Joe Wieskamp No. 25 in ESPN's New Top 60 for '18

[DP5555]

It depends on how you define "disappointed". If you consider it to be something that fell short of expectations, then I can't consider this year to be a disappointment if I expect this team to be NIT material, and that's where they end up. But it doesn't mean I'll be thrilled with an NIT bid, either.

Lickliter "met expectations" his last year or two, but (most) people expected that team to stink - didn't make it a good year for the team.

In other words, I don't put a lot of stock into pre-season expectations in a vacuum - I look more at where we've been, and where we're trending to. That doesn't mean I'll be ticked off this year if the Hawks miss the dance, but we can't stay down at that level, either. Gotta bounce back.

That's my 2 cents.

I agree with this. I think it's all based upon expectations. If I think it's probably going to be a rebuilding year then I won't be disappointed if that's what it ends up being. They are due for one. That's the way it works. The Hawks aren't and never will be a blue blood program. They have to scout for under the radar talent, hope to land a couple really good players, and then piece them all together to form a solid team that can compete at a high level. I'm realistic enough to understand that it takes time. Fortunately, I think Fran has proven he's the right guy to do it. He's really good at spotting under the radar talent. Tyler Cook was a big fish for him to land. It all depends on how quickly they can get experience and learn how to play efficiently together.

I'm just not sold they have enough pieces to the puzzle yet. I think Bohannon and Williams have potential, but they are both going to need some serious experience before I believe they'll be able to compete at a high level in the B10. It doesn't seem as if they have the kind of ability where they can learn how to do that overnight.

 

[SteveGarvey1]

It depends on how you define "disappointed". If you consider it to be something that fell short of expectations, then I can't consider this year to be a disappointment if I expect this team to be NIT material, and that's where they end up. But it doesn't mean I'll be thrilled with an NIT bid, either.

Lickliter "met expectations" his last year or two, but (most) people expected that team to stink - didn't mean we were supposed to be happy about it, right?

In other words, I don't put a lot of stock into pre-season expectations in a vacuum as a measure of how I should feel about the season as a whole - I look more at where we've been, and where we're trending to, and how we got to the end result. Besides, teams can be better/worse than expected. That doesn't mean I'll be ticked off this year if the Hawks miss the dance, but we can't stay down at that level, either. Gotta bounce back.

That's my 2 cents.

I don't even think we met expectations Lickliter's last year or two. I think our expectations were that we were going to be terrible but instead we became a pathetic laughingstock.

 

[Hawk5656]

I agree with this. I think it's all based upon expectations. If I think it's probably going to be a rebuilding year then I won't be disappointed if that's what it ends up being. They are due for one. That's the way it works. The Hawks aren't and never will be a blue blood program. They have to scout for under the radar talent, hope to land a couple really good players, and then piece them all together to form a solid team that can compete at a high level. I'm realistic enough to understand that it takes time. Fortunately, I think Fran has proven he's the right guy to do it. He's really good at spotting under the radar talent. Tyler Cook was a big fish for him to land. It all depends on how quickly they can get experience and learn how to play efficiently together.

I'm just not sold they have enough pieces to the puzzle yet. I think Bohannon and Williams have potential, but they are both going to need some serious experience before I believe they'll be able to compete at a high level in the B10. It doesn't seem as if they have the kind of ability where they can learn how to do that overnight.

I also think going into a season with expectations of not making the NCAA Tournament is disappointing. If we would have landed one of the bigger PG targets we recruited I think expectations would be higher.

 

[InGoodCo]

I also think going into a season with expectations of not making the NCAA Tournament is disappointing. If we would have landed one of the bigger PG targets we recruited I think expectations would be higher.

shhhesh - Iowa graduated statistically one of the best classes ever to play at Iowa - and even though that's a fact, Iowa is still currently in Lunardi's pre-season bracketology as a 7 seed for this coming season (so, technically, one of the best college basketball analyst out there thinks Iowa is dancing in 17), Hawks bring back what is likely a 1st team preseason All B1G player and one of the best scorers in the country, have loads of talent that have been in the system for a season but lack the experience and Iowa is bringing in a nice class that is anchored by a top 40 player. You being disappointed is a YOU thing.

 

[Hawk5656]

shhhesh - Iowa graduated statistically one of the best classes ever to play at Iowa - and even though that's a fact, Iowa is still currently in Lunardi's pre-season bracketology as a 7 seed for this coming season (so, technically, one of the best college basketball analyst out there thinks Iowa is dancing in 17), Hawks bring back what is likely a 1st team preseason All B1G player and one of the best scorers in the country, have loads of talent that have been in the system for a season but lack the experience and Iowa is bringing in a nice class that is anchored by a top 40 player. You being disappointed is a YOU thing.

We have all those things but still don't have a PG, that's not a me problem

 

[AdamHawk]

We have all those things but still don't have a PG, that's not a me problem

I will give you credit, you do a good job of keeping threads going even though it's just to argue for the sake of arguing. One of the more productive trolls on here.

 

[Thawki]

The fact we're going from three straight NCAA apperances to probably an NIT at best is because of his recruiting though so I get why some people criticize it. If you say "Fran can't recruit" that doesn't make sense but I do think it's the weakest part of his coaching. If he could improve his recruiting he could take us to the next level

So it's settled: We are going to the NIT next year.

I am glad we got that out of the way.

Give me a break. You are making a case for something based upon your assumption that we will go to the NIT next year and it is June? That is one of the most idiotic things I have heard in a long time on this board. Even if we do only go NIT, it is idiotic to state it as a foregone conclusion in June, based upon what this staff has accomplished while at Iowa.

 

[DP5555]

I will give you credit, you do a good job of keeping threads going even though it's just to argue for the sake of arguing. One of the more productive trolls on here.

Amen. It's what he does. It's the offseason though and there's nothing to talk about so I don't mind stooping to his level on occasion.

 

[Hawk5656]

So it's settled: We are going to the NIT next year.

I am glad we got that out of the way.

Give me a break. You are making a case for something based upon your assumption that we will go to the NIT next year and it is June? That is one of the most idiotic things I have heard in a long time on this board. Even if we do only go NIT, it is idiotic to state it as a foregone conclusion in June, based upon what this staff has accomplished while at Iowa.

I think most people on this board are expecting or assuming an NIT appearance. I personally don't think we will make the Tournament because of our PG situation but I could be wrong. It's not like I'm guaranteeing anything or trying to troll here.

I think it's someone what disappointing that our expectations are NIT in year 7 with the same coaching staff but rebuilding years happen when you miss on some key recruiting positions

 

[AdamHawk]

Amen. It's what he does. It's the offseason though and there's nothing to talk about so I don't mind stooping to his level on occasion.

Yeah, doesn't hurt to have an antagonist roaming the boards this time of year.

 

[meaning]

So it's settled: We are going to the NIT next year.

I am glad we got that out of the way.

Give me a break. You are making a case for something based upon your assumption that we will go to the NIT next year and it is June? That is one of the most idiotic things I have heard in a long time on this board. Even if we do only go NIT, it is idiotic to state it as a foregone conclusion in June, based upon what this staff has accomplished while at Iowa.

People expected NIT/bubble this past year, on account of losing aaron white.

We got votes for NUMBER ONE in the country. Granted, we came back to earth, but finished right around the top 25.

I'm ok with letting the season play out. The team usually exceeds my pre-season expectations; I'm good with that.

 

[NikeHawk21]

but rebuilding years happen when you...

Lose 4 senior starters.

Bottom line. I don't think you've mentioned that in any of your backhanded posts.

 

[Hawk5656]

Lose 4 senior starters.

Bottom line. I don't think you've mentioned that in any of your backhanded posts.

Teams lose seniors and still can reload and make the NCAA tournament, when they don't it's usually because of recruiting. If we would have gotten a good PG this year I think we make the tournament no problem. That's not backhanded at all, I mean we're returning one of the conferences top players

 

[NikeHawk21]

Teams lose seniors and still can reload and make the NCAA tournament, when they don't it's usually because of recruiting. If we would have gotten a good PG this year I think we make the tournament no problem. That's not backhanded at all, I mean we're returning one of the conferences top players

Do you have any examples of teams losing four senior starters and then reloading the next year? Also, the NIT bar was set by yourself anyways so it's all just hypothetical at this point.

You literally said in this very thread that Fran's biggest weakness is recruiting. Therefore I give anything you say zero credibility.

 

[Hawk5656]

Do you have any examples of teams losing four senior starters and then reloading the next year? Also, the NIT bar was set by yourself anyways so it's all just hypothetical at this point.

You literally said in this very thread that Fran's biggest weakness is recruiting. Therefore I give anything you say zero credibility.

Didn't Wisconsin just lose 5 of their top 7 players and their coach and still made the Sweet 16 last year?

I do think Fran's biggest weakness is his recruiting and that's not saying he's bad at it I just think he's really good at everything else. His lack of ability to recruit the PG position has been a glaring issue though, there's really no way you can deny that and it's a huge question mark going into this season.

 

[NikeHawk21]

Didn't Wisconsin just lose 5 of their top 7 players and their coach and still made the Sweet 16 last year?

I do think Fran's biggest weakness is his recruiting and that's not saying he's bad at it I just think he's really good at everything else. His lack of ability to recruit the PG position has been a glaring issue though, there's really no way you can deny that and it's a huge question mark going into this season.

UW is a fine example. I would argue though that at times this year it was looking like they were headed for the NIT at best, they got it turned around however, which is in large part due to the strong program they have in place. They also returned 2 starters including a PG, and that was from back to back final four teams. We are losing two PGs. Right now UW's BBall program is probably considered a top 10 program in the country, and clearly ahead of Iowa. Either way good example, it can be done, and I won't be surprised if Iowa wins a game or two in the NCAA's next year.

My next question would be if CW ends up being a solid or great PG, are you going to finely put that dead horse (PG recruiting) to rest? I'd estimate probably not but it be interesting to get your take.

I think your problem is your so enamored by star ratings. RDM probably ended up being better than most of the 4/5 star players in his class. Aaron White the same. Heck if I remember right Jok ended up a 3-star. Once you get on the court star ratings mean nothing.

 

[DP5555]

Didn't Wisconsin just lose 5 of their top 7 players and their coach and still made the Sweet 16 last year?

I do think Fran's biggest weakness is his recruiting and that's not saying he's bad at it I just think he's really good at everything else. His lack of ability to recruit the PG position has been a glaring issue though, there's really no way you can deny that and it's a huge question mark going into this season.

Please tell me what exactly you think Fran could have done differently in order to land a kid like Tyler Ulis or Charlie Moore.... I'll wait.

Do you want him to break the rules? He's physically doing everything he can to land an elite PG. He isn't coaching at Kentucky. He can't compete with that. I bet Fran attended way more games of both Ulis and Moore than any of the other schools recruiting them. At some point, there's nothing else he can do except swallow his pride and move onto the next one.

He hasn't been able to land a big fish at the PG position, besides Gesell, but it isn't because of a lack of effort so I see no reason to hold it against him. Often times he spots talented guys before everyone else does (like Ulis), but it isn't as easy as some people make it sound to keep them interested in Iowa after they blow up on the recruiting radar and the big dogs come calling.

 

[Hawk5656]

UW is a fine example. I would argue though that at times this year it was looking like they were headed for the NIT at best, they got it turned around however, which is in large part due to the strong program they have in place. They also returned 2 starters including a PG, and that was from back to back final four teams. We are losing two PGs. Right now UW's BBall program is probably considered a top 10 program in the country, and clearly ahead of Iowa. Either way good example, it can be done, and I won't be surprised if Iowa wins a game or two in the NCAA's next year.

My next question would be if CW ends up being a solid or great PG, are you going to finely put that dead horse (PG recruiting) to rest? I'd estimate probably not but it be interesting to get your take.

I think your problem is your so enamored by star ratings. RDM probably ended up being better than most of the 4/5 star players in his class. Aaron White the same. Heck if I remember right Jok ended up a 3-star. Once you get on the court star ratings mean nothing.

If CW ends up being a solid or great PG I will be thrilled and put it to rest. I'm not enamored by star ratings at all, it's not comforting that a 6'6 PG had no big offers late in the recruiting period but I'm more concerned about his lack of playing time last year when there was minutes to be had

 

[Hawk5656]

Please tell me what exactly you think Fran could have done differently in order to land a kid like Tyler Ulis or Charlie Moore.... I'll wait.

Do you want him to break the rules? He's physically doing everything he can to land an elite PG. He isn't coaching at Kentucky. He can't compete with that. I bet Fran attended way more games of both Ulis and Moore than any of the other schools recruiting them. At some point, there's nothing else he can do except swallow his pride and move onto the next one.

He hasn't been able to land a big fish at the PG position, besides Gesell, but it isn't because of a lack of effort so I see no reason to hold it against him. Often times he spots talented guys before everyone else does (like Ulis), but it isn't as easy as some people make it sound to keep them interested in Iowa after they blow up on the recruiting radar and the big dogs come calling.

You do realize he passed on Monte Morris right? It's not just Ulis and Moore either, there were plenty other PG's he missed on that wouldn't have required cheating and it seems like every other program can get them.

 

[Hawk5656]

Please tell me what exactly you think Fran could have done differently in order to land a kid like Tyler Ulis or Charlie Moore.... I'll wait.

Do you want him to break the rules? He's physically doing everything he can to land an elite PG. He isn't coaching at Kentucky. He can't compete with that. I bet Fran attended way more games of both Ulis and Moore than any of the other schools recruiting them. At some point, there's nothing else he can do except swallow his pride and move onto the next one.

He hasn't been able to land a big fish at the PG position, besides Gesell, but it isn't because of a lack of effort so I see no reason to hold it against him. Often times he spots talented guys before everyone else does (like Ulis), but it isn't as easy as some people make it sound to keep them interested in Iowa after they blow up on the recruiting radar and the big dogs come calling.

Here's PG's we went after last year before we offered Bohannon who accepted on the spot:

Tony Carr - Penn State
Payton Pritchard - Oregon
Xavier Simpson - Michigan
Charlie Moore - California
Donovan Jackson - Iowa State
Temple Gibbs - Notre Dame
Devonte Green - Indiana