Joe Wieskamp Going Through NBA Draft Process

oldhawk12 said:
Yes. Because just because you break a scoring record doesn’t necessarily make you a better player. It’s similar as the people that build up kf as something he isn’t based on wins. You have to be a deeper thinker than that
Click to expand...

Who's ever tried to build KF up to be more than a good football coach? He is. That's hard to debate. But, he's never won a national title. So he's not elite. There are many coaches with higher winning percentages. So, he's not tops in that. He's only won 2 BTT in 20 years (in KF's defense, like that's 2 more than like 9 other Big Ten Schools). Literally all KF has is the wins and longevity. He's one of the most consistent coaches in the game, and he's made Iowa one of the most consistent winners in college football year in and year out. Iowa is very rarely bad at football, which is close to unheard of for a school with it's geographical disadvantages. KF is a pretty good football coach, his #'s bare it out. I wouldn't say he's any more than that and I've never really heard anyone try and say he is.
 
InGoodCo said:
Who's ever tried to build KF up to be more than a good football coach? He is. That's hard to debate. But, he's never won a national title. So he's not elite. There are many coaches with higher winning percentages. So, he's not tops in that. He's only won 2 BTT in 20 years (in KF's defense, like that's 2 more than like 9 other Big Ten Schools). Literally all KF has is the wins and longevity. He's one of the most consistent coaches in the game, and he's made Iowa one of the most consistent winners in college football year in and year out. Iowa is very rarely bad at football, which is close to unheard of for a school with it's geographical disadvantages. KF is a pretty good football coach, his #'s bare it out. I wouldn't say he's any more than that and I've never really heard anyone try and say he is.
Click to expand...
They don’t play anyone. Just like tom davis, he’s built up a legacy built upon paper wins rather than substance.
 
Adam said:
What I don't get is why so many people think that their perception, perspective and opinions are somehow universal fact. Why is it so hard to realize that an opinion is subjective? How hard is it to state one's opinions as such?
Click to expand...
You mean...like you just did? When you called my opinion a...”garbage one”?
 
oldhawk12 said:
They don’t play anyone. Just like tom davis, he’s built up a legacy built upon paper wins rather than substance.
Click to expand...

They play in the Big Ten. It doesn't get a lot better in college football. Literally one of the toughest conferences in the sport. They beat MSU this season from the SEC. They beat #4 Ohio State last season and faced what was considered a top 10 schedule. KF has so many top 25 W's in football it would take me hours to count. You're opinion of KF is fine by me, but at least form it with facts. To say that he doesn't beat anyone is dishonest. To say he doesn't play anyone is dishonest. If you said, well, he loses to some teams he shouldn't - well, we'd agree, but there aint shit wrong with who's he played to get there. Comparatively speaking, it's just as grand of opponent as anyone else has faced in college football.
 
InGoodCo said:
They play in the Big Ten. It doesn't get a lot better in college football. Literally one of the toughest conferences in the sport. They beat MSU this season from the SEC. They beat #4 Ohio State last season and faced what was considered a top 10 schedule. KF has so many top 25 W's in football it would take me hours to count. You're opinion of KF is fine by me, but at least form it with facts. To say that he doesn't beat anyone is dishonest. To say he doesn't play anyone is dishonest. If you said, well, he loses to some teams he shouldn't - well, we'd agree, but there aint shit wrong with who's he played to get there. Comparatively speaking, it's just as grand of opponent as anyone else has faced in college football.
Click to expand...
You aren’t objective about him so I’m not getting into this conversation with you. Once again, you are trying to win an argument by hiding behind a conference and by “wins” rather than through substance. His non-conference schedules are annual jokes. Never leaves the state and has hid in the incredibly weak b10 west for years. His major bowl performances in recent yrs are abysmal. He occasionally beats someone in conference he shouldn’t but a lot of teams do that. Bottom line is, just like davis was, he’s overrated. Now back to weiskamp. One of the better homegrown talents we’ve seen in years. Here’s to hoping he comes back and makes bobby hansen blush for the next three
 
oldhawk12 said:
You aren’t objective about him so I’m not getting into this conversation with you. Once again, you are trying to win an argument by hiding behind a conference and by “wins” rather than through substance. His non-conference schedules are annual jokes. Never leaves the state and has hid in the incredibly weak b10 west for years. His major bowl performances in recent yrs are abysmal. He occasionally beats someone in conference he shouldn’t but a lot of teams do that. Bottom line is, just like davis was, he’s overrated. Now back to weiskamp. One of the better homegrown talents we’ve seen in years. Here’s to hoping he comes back and makes bobby hansen blush for the next three
Click to expand...

I just looked up "bias" in the dictionary and there was your picture, old hawk.
 
oldhawk12 said:
I take it you weren’t around during the Raveling recruiting era. I love Weiskamp but he doesn’t see the floor on the 86-88 teams that had as many as 13 guys that went on to play professionally...many in the NBA. So...you must be talking about the AR or “after Raveling “ period when we quit recruiting talent
Click to expand...
Doesn't see the floor?
 
PCHawk said:
Doesn't see the floor?
Click to expand...
I think he’d have a hard tim getting on the floor on the final 8 squad. Correct. They were loaded. Joe is good and is going to be special. The top 7-8 players on that team were all special. The players he would be up against had incredible quicks and athleticism. As mentioned, Gamble alone played 11 yrs in the league. We are questioning whether Joe makes it at all. BJ, Marble are other phenomenal talents that were All Americans that were NBA players with special talents. There were many players riding the pine that would have started for a lot of teams.
 
trj said:
Jeff Moe saw the floor, but somehow JW wouldn't have. Makes perfect sense to me. Look man, you gotta do a better job of understanding clown logic.;)
Click to expand...
He was a specialist that came in to shoot threes. More of a role player. Although he was a hell of a shooter
 
I
Adam said:
Well you're certainly entitled to your opinion. Even if it is a garbage one.
Click to expand...
I'm with Oldhawk on this. I watched all Marble's games. It's a very similar conversation then about Roy as now about TC. Roy was not a consistent or especially good jump shooter or ball handler. Great athlete and slasher but he had holes in his game. Roy was a ferocious competitor. He got his chance in the NBA but personal issues cost him. I don't believe he would have stuck anyway because he lacked the shot and was undersized at 6'6 for a forward. Joe has good size for a guard. His handles will get better and better. He is a great quick jumper and good passer. I hope he stays long enough to see just how good he can be.
 
dahlhawk said:
I

I'm with Oldhawk on this. I watched all Marble's games. It's a very similar conversation then about Roy as now about TC. Roy was not a consistent or especially good jump shooter or ball handler. Great athlete and slasher but he had holes in his game. Roy was a ferocious competitor. He got his chance in the NBA but personal issues cost him. I don't believe he would have stuck anyway because he lacked the shot and was undersized at 6'6 for a forward. Joe has good size for a guard. His handles will get better and better. He is a great quick jumper and good passer. I hope he stays long enough to see just how good he can be.
Click to expand...

Marble was more athletic. Joe is a better all around player already considering the dead eye skills. He will likely never be the same athlete or player type that Marble was, but that doesn't mean that he won't be a better player. Of course only time will tell, but JW has a super high ceiling and Marble's lack of a consistent 3 ball limited his.
 
Adam said:
Marble was more athletic. Joe is a better all around player already considering the dead eye skills. He will likely never be the same athlete or player type that Marble was, but that doesn't mean that he won't be a better player. Of course only time will tell, but JW has a super high ceiling and Marble's lack of a consistent 3 ball limited his.
Click to expand...
Reread some of the posts I just browsed through and I guess my opinion is the opposite of Oldhawk. Roy scored in a lot of ways, transition, driving to the basket, and free throws. His jump shot was always a work in progress. It limited his effectiveness. I think people really underestimate Joe's athletic ability. His second jump is one of best I've seen in years. He can miss and goes up strong on his second jump for a tip or rebound like he's on a trampoline. He can flat out stroke it and like a lot of great players he doesn't seem to overthink his game. He shoots the ball the same in the first minute of the game as the last, that's tough for a freshman to do. Roy really struggled in the half court game.
 
dahlhawk said:
Reread some of the posts I just browsed through and I guess my opinion is the opposite of Oldhawk. Roy scored in a lot of ways, transition, driving to the basket, and free throws. His jump shot was always a work in progress. It limited his effectiveness. I think people really underestimate Joe's athletic ability. His second jump is one of best I've seen in years. He can miss and goes up strong on his second jump for a tip or rebound like he's on a trampoline. He can flat out stroke it and like a lot of great players he doesn't seem to overthink his game. He shoots the ball the same in the first minute of the game as the last, that's tough for a freshman to do. Roy really struggled in the half court game.
Click to expand...

Thank you.
 
dahlhawk said:
Reread some of the posts I just browsed through and I guess my opinion is the opposite of Oldhawk. Roy scored in a lot of ways, transition, driving to the basket, and free throws. His jump shot was always a work in progress. It limited his effectiveness. I think people really underestimate Joe's athletic ability. His second jump is one of best I've seen in years. He can miss and goes up strong on his second jump for a tip or rebound like he's on a trampoline. He can flat out stroke it and like a lot of great players he doesn't seem to overthink his game. He shoots the ball the same in the first minute of the game as the last, that's tough for a freshman to do. Roy really struggled in the half court game.
Click to expand...
Roy struggled with outside shooting. I don't think he struggled as bad in the half court as you remember. Not with 2,116 career points and not with all the trips he made to the free throw line, which generally counts as half court offense.

This is a difficult comparison anyway. You're comparing two different skill sets in eras that a thirty years apart. It will be interesting to see how Joe's career numbers stack up.
 
oldhawk12 said:
You aren’t objective about him so I’m not getting into this conversation with you. Once again, you are trying to win an argument by hiding behind a conference and by “wins” rather than through substance. His non-conference schedules are annual jokes. Never leaves the state and has hid in the incredibly weak b10 west for years. His major bowl performances in recent yrs are abysmal. He occasionally beats someone in conference he shouldn’t but a lot of teams do that. Bottom line is, just like davis was, he’s overrated. Now back to weiskamp. One of the better homegrown talents we’ve seen in years. Here’s to hoping he comes back and makes bobby hansen blush for the next three
Click to expand...

That's not true either. I am trying to look at it from a fairly unbiased stand point. Iowa plays as good as schedule as any team year in and year out in the P5. Some years are up and some years down, depends on the strength of their opponent is on a given year. Guess what, that's how it works for every team. If that's biased, then prove me wrong. Who plays tougher schedules every season? What coach IS facing a gauntlet? The burden of proof lies with you but here's a clue, I'll shoot holes in whatever team sans maybe 1 or 2 every season.

That's the point, you are the one with bias because you're making blanket accusations with not a trace of evidence to back it up. Do you know the B1G West record vs the East? It's closer then you think. Do you know the B1G West record in bowl games vs the east? Vs the SEC? Might make ya think instead of just bringing up old myths and what ESPN tells ya.

Look at how other teams schedule? Before the B1G went to a 9 game schedule a few years ago, Iowa was one of the few programs in the country that annually faced 2 p5 opponents in their OOC. It is what it is, but ISU kind of hamstrung them, so they typically faced another test like a Pitt or Arizona State etc. The SEC wasn't doing that. They still aren't. Hiding in B1G West? Haha. There is no hiding in power 5 football. Teams get exposed for their weaknesses every season.

You can't live your life in a vacuum. Compare Iowa to their peers and they stack up pretty well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top