Jirehl Brock Talks About Final Five, Visits, Upcoming Decision

deanvogs said:
Iowa doesn’t have Rivals evaluate its prospects. Iowa rated Goodson and Brock as equal in talent and probably would have taken Brock if he committed first. If you go by Rankings Brock > Goodson. If you go by offers Goodson > Brock
Click to expand...
Oh I wasn't even comparing the two so much as I was just pointing out how Iowa is turning down a highly regarded RB recruit. It's just not an every year thing so much. Usually it's the Higdons and Gordons of the world pulling the rug on us at some point. Here's Iowa telling this kid who very well may have liked to play for us sorry no room... It's a better spot to be in for a change.

With the type of RBs Iowa currently has with Geil and Sargent I think Goodson (and here we are assuming he's coming since he hasn't committed yet) is a better fit to go with them than Brock would be. And that probably has a lot to do with the choice between them as anything. But that's just me guessing
 
ArvadaHawk said:
i think you take a 4* RB if you're program has been built on the running game. At least, you don't initiate canceling a visit and telling the 4* rb "no thanks." Now, maybe Iowa learned JB had already dropped Iowa in his ranking and we were effectively out of it. still, you don't cancel the visit. let the 4* rb visit if he wants to visit.
Click to expand...

First off, if you are full, why wouldn't you be straight up with the kid? Let him take an official somewhere else if he wants?
I understand most programs wouldn't do that, but we are honest with kids and their families. I respect that and wouldn't call it a knock on the coaches or program.
Secondly the difference in scouting reports is minimal. Extremely minimal. So we can sit around all day and argue if a low 4* is better than a high 3* all we want, but, and I always go back to this, I'm not getting paid to do it, so whatev.
If they saw them as equal, I could see how. If they saw either one as slightly better, I could see how.
 
Hawkfnntn said:
Oh I wasn't even comparing the two so much as I was just pointing out how Iowa is turning down a highly regarded RB recruit. It's just not an every year thing so much. Usually it's the Higdons and Gordons of the world pulling the rug on us at some point. Here's Iowa telling this kid who very well may have liked to play for us sorry no room... It's a better spot to be in for a change.

With the type of RBs Iowa currently has with Geil and Sargent I think Goodson (and here we are assuming he's coming since he hasn't committed yet) is a better fit to go with them than Brock would be. And that probably has a lot to do with the choice between them as anything. But that's just me guessing
Click to expand...

Yeah everyone is forgetting about Geil. He has a bunch of up side as well.
 
4thngoal said:
Yeah everyone is forgetting about Geil. He has a bunch of up side as well.
Click to expand...
For sure. He seems like a great kid from what I've read about him too. Minus any of the disease that shall not be named again on here from happening we are in great shape at the RB position. Nobody is graduating after next year. It's very much a position of strength for us. As much as it can be anyway.
 
There's a lot of ways to get to "adios" in a relationship. After all the time invested in Brock Iowa may well have not seen the signs they would like to see at this point that indicated they were beyond just being equal to various other offers in Brock's mind. My guess would be that they could see any early momentum with Brock was going nowhere as of late.

Besides, we're more interested in fit than stars :). It all blows up if Goodson commits elsewhere.
 
Hawkfnntn said:
For sure. He seems like a great kid from what I've read about him too. Minus any of the disease that shall not be named again on here from happening we are in great shape at the RB position. Nobody is graduating after next year. It's very much a position of strength for us. As much as it can be anyway.
Click to expand...
He's going to be fun to watch. Sounds like an outstanding young man. Let's just hope he has a mean streak and likes to run people over. Could be a great power back.
 
4thngoal said:
First off, if you are full, why wouldn't you be straight up with the kid? Let him take an official somewhere else if he wants?
I understand most programs wouldn't do that, but we are honest with kids and their families. I respect that and wouldn't call it a knock on the coaches or program.
Secondly the difference in scouting reports is minimal. Extremely minimal. So we can sit around all day and argue if a low 4* is better than a high 3* all we want, but, and I always go back to this, I'm not getting paid to do it, so whatev.
If they saw them as equal, I could see how. If they saw either one as slightly better, I could see how.
Click to expand...

AIHRBG.
 
I highly doubt this is a scholly limit situation. Chances are, for whatever reason, one party broke up with the other. The frustrating part is that there's a good chance we'll never be privy to the details.

Even if Iowa feels solid about Goodson, my gut says they still would have taken Brock. This staff has a keen understanding about the importance of having enough bodies at the RB position, especially with Toks up in the air and Bryan coming off injury.
 
I think sharing the load a little has probably resulted in less time missed by rb's. Creating depth is great in many ways.
 
Brock says Iowa cancelled the visit. Iowa, of course, can't comment on it. For all we know, Iowa cancelled AFTER Brock gave an honest answer/assessment, i.e., "I'm still waiting on an offer from BlueBlood U, Coach X. If it comes, I will definitely not be committing to Iowa". Thus, "That's fine, but we think it's a waste for you to take an official visit if that's the case". Or, the staff heard/read/was told something that changed their view. Or maybe any number of possibilities.

It doesn't really matter at this point. The one thing we know is that we won't have a BlueBlood U swooping in to take him from Iowa the morning of National Signing Day.
 
hawkeyebob62 said:
Brock says Iowa cancelled the visit. Iowa, of course, can't comment on it. For all we know, Iowa cancelled AFTER Brock gave an honest answer/assessment, i.e., "I'm still waiting on an offer from BlueBlood U, Coach X. If it comes, I will definitely not be committing to Iowa". Thus, "That's fine, but we think it's a waste for you to take an official visit if that's the case". Or, the staff heard/read/was told something that changed their view. Or maybe any number of possibilities.

It doesn't really matter at this point. The one thing we know is that we won't have a BlueBlood U swooping in to take him from Iowa the morning of National Signing Day.
Click to expand...
The recent commitment of Sargent speaks to the lack of coincidence here. Iowa isn't looking at taking 2 RBs this class and until Goodson says he's had the same thing happen to him as far as his scholly offer being yanked we can assume Iowa has just chosen him over Brock. Kinda risky since he hasn't committed to us either. I would think Iowa could have let Brock still visit and just let those two guys know Iowa's only taking one so the first one to commit wins. But since that isn't how they are doing it Iowa must be putting all their eggs in Goodsons basket and hoping he commits...
 
Hawkfnntn said:
The recent commitment of Sargent speaks to the lack of coincidence here. Iowa isn't looking at taking 2 RBs this class and until Goodson says he's had the same thing happen to him as far as his scholly offer being yanked we can assume Iowa has just chosen him over Brock. Kinda risky since he hasn't committed to us either. I would think Iowa could have let Brock still visit and just let those two guys know Iowa's only taking one so the first one to commit wins. But since that isn't how they are doing it Iowa must be putting all their eggs in Goodsons basket and hoping he commits...
Click to expand...

you're saying that Iowa is choosing Goodson over Brock and not Sargent over Brock, right? if you are, then I agree. But, I think it is short-sighted to tell your #1 thanks but no thanks. just the optics of it are bad; even if there is a valid reason. you let him visit if he still wants to. now, all programs can negatively recruit against Iowa by telling recruits "being Iowa's #1 doesn't mean jack. Even if you've verballed, they could just change their minds."

that is why I think it wasn't the right way to go. Let him visit.
 
ArvadaHawk said:
you're saying that Iowa is choosing Goodson over Brock and not Sargent over Brock, right? if you are, then I agree. But, I think it is short-sighted to tell your #1 thanks but no thanks. just the optics of it are bad; even if there is a valid reason. you let him visit if he still wants to. now, all programs can negatively recruit against Iowa by telling recruits "being Iowa's #1 doesn't mean jack. Even if you've verballed, they could just change their minds."

that is why I think it wasn't the right way to go. Let him visit.
Click to expand...
Yes. That's how I meant that. I don't totally disagree with ya on that. I think and hope there's just more to the Goodson recruitment that we just don't know about. As in a pretty darn good idea that he is on board. Because if not wouldn't Brock be a heck of a 2nd choice? Most of the time recruiting is a race for spots first to commit gets it. Well this doesn't make a ton of sense if Goodsons offer is still good if he hasn't taken it already and telling Brock he can't have it. I mean if Goodson eventually says he's going someplace else do we try jumping back on Brock? Yeah good luck with that now... No chance of that. So I think Goodson must be on board already without it being 'official' but heck if I know
 
What if (not saying this is how it is), Goodson already gave his verbal or better yet signed and asked everyone to just zip it, so he can announce on July 3rd?
Plus Brock will just be getting back from all his visits and just starting to think it all over.
 
Hawkfnntn said:
Yes. That's how I meant that. I don't totally disagree with ya on that. I think and hope there's just more to the Goodson recruitment that we just don't know about. As in a pretty darn good idea that he is on board. Because if not wouldn't Brock be a heck of a 2nd choice? Most of the time recruiting is a race for spots first to commit gets it. Well this doesn't make a ton of sense if Goodsons offer is still good if he hasn't taken it already and telling Brock he can't have it. I mean if Goodson eventually says he's going someplace else do we try jumping back on Brock? Yeah good luck with that now... No chance of that. So I think Goodson must be on board already without it being 'official' but heck if I know
Click to expand...

i believe they feel 100% confident with Goodson committing. My point is beyond that. You should NEVER tell your #1 "thanks, but no thanks. We're canceling your visit." You let your #1 visit. What the hell, what if you strike gold and you get all 3???!!!
 
ArvadaHawk said:
i believe they feel 100% confident with Goodson committing. My point is beyond that. You should NEVER tell your #1 "thanks, but no thanks. We're canceling your visit." You let your #1 visit. What the hell, what if you strike gold and you get all 3???!!!
Click to expand...
That's where it was impossible. It's too early to sign Brock and Goodson. Both could only be verbals at this point to anyone. Sargent is signed as a Juco he's a done deal. But the reason we can't have all 3 is because unless either Brock or Goodson want to walk on there isn't a scholly available for both. It's one or the other at this point.
 
Hawkfnntn said:
That's where it was impossible. It's too early to sign Brock and Goodson. Both could only be verbals at this point to anyone. Sargent is signed as a Juco he's a done deal. But the reason we can't have all 3 is because unless either Brock or Goodson want to walk on there isn't a scholly available for both. It's one or the other at this point.
Click to expand...

if iowa wouldn't take their #1 target are rb due to no scholly available, then i'd have to ask how many kickers, punters, long snappers, 3rd string db's and WR's changing to rb (that won't play) do you need out of your 85?

but my point in this specific instance is IOWA CANCELING the scheduled visit of their #1 target. what would it have hurt to let him visit? until signing day, anything can happen. and the optics of the school canceling their #1 target isn't good.
 
ArvadaHawk said:
if iowa wouldn't take their #1 target are rb due to no scholly available, then i'd have to ask how many kickers, punters, long snappers, 3rd string db's and WR's changing to rb (that won't play) do you need out of your 85?

but my point in this specific instance is IOWA CANCELING the scheduled visit of their #1 target. what would it have hurt to let him visit? until signing day, anything can happen. and the optics of the school canceling their #1 target isn't good.
Click to expand...

This could be one of those things that set Iowa apart. They apparently have no intention of taking his commitment, so why waste one of the kids 5 official visits he can take? So that they can keep him on the line until July 3rd when Goodson's silent verbal goes public? That, to me, is a real douche move.

Now I know, that is pure speculation on my part. But it seems as plausible as any other explanation.

The only other thing that makes sense to me is that they cooled on Brock due to some personal reason. The only evidence of this is that Purdue cooled as well. But I prefer my first thought.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top