hawkeyebob62
Well-Known Member
^^In a nutshell^^
playing Franball isn't so bad
- Thread starter Zstatman
- Start date
^^In a nutshell^^
The difference between Krik and Fran is that Kirk has consistently put players in the pros and every few years we are finishing in the top ten. We are also almost always in contention for a Big 10 title. I would say that Iowa has been one of the top 25 programs overall during Kirk's tenure.
Fran has done non of those things. Also Kirk has never chased a ref down a hallway. But as far as caring about their players, yes I would agree that they are similar. Generally speaking we recruit quality individuals that for the most part stay out of trouble which seems to be rare in college sports these days. Unless you are MSU that has the cops in your back pocket and players stay out of trouble that way.
Motigerhawk
Well-Known Member
Speaking of PGs, there is a HS girls team in our conference that was solid. A couple good shooters and then the rest. They were pretty good. A 500 team. Our conference is the best the best in the state top to bottom, usually. This year they hired a new coach who has a daughter that is a JR. She was named the MVP of the state finals in Arkansas last year as a soph. She is a PG and committed to Arkansas St.
This girl has changed the team. They are fantastic now. This girl has a high BB IQ, can shoot and pass and makes everyone around her better. This team will win our conference and make some noise at state.
My point being, an elite PG is a program changing asset. Those type of players can take a good team and make them great.
Iowa should now be focused on getting this type of player. We have the players to be good, but lack that one guy that can us great. Is it Joe T.? Maybe. Will it be the Ulis kid? Hopefully.
But put a Ronnie Lester type on this team and we are challenging for the B1G title.
This girl has changed the team. They are fantastic now. This girl has a high BB IQ, can shoot and pass and makes everyone around her better. This team will win our conference and make some noise at state.
My point being, an elite PG is a program changing asset. Those type of players can take a good team and make them great.
Iowa should now be focused on getting this type of player. We have the players to be good, but lack that one guy that can us great. Is it Joe T.? Maybe. Will it be the Ulis kid? Hopefully.
But put a Ronnie Lester type on this team and we are challenging for the B1G title.
Add one elite player to any good team and that team gets way better, regardless of position.
NikeHawk21
Well-Known Member
It’s so hard to do an apples to apples comparison of football and basketball at Iowa. I always find that one funny.
First off Iowa is a football school and that’s where they invest more resources.
Secondly there are many many more D1 basketball schools to compete with. Not only your UNI’s Drake’s, you also have in the Midwest your Creighton, Marquette, Xavier, DePaul, Nova (East), teams that don’t really compete on the football landscape.
Lastly, the elephant in the room which is the illegal recruiting practices which seem to be much more common in college basketball.
I’m all for a fair evaluation and discussion on Fran when it is warranted, but comparing it to Kirk’s football program is not realistic in my estimation.
WindsorHawk
Well-Known Member
I will be.
Another poster brought up the comparison and them being similar I was responding that they are not similar and Kirk has been more effective. I do think it's a valid criticism of Fran that he hasn't put anyone in the NBA. It shows that he isn't getting the high level players that can make it in the pros. Other teams in the conference have put people into the pros. Football team not only puts players in the pros but some of the best at their position. The state of Iowa has produced NBA players during Frans tenure but none have come through the U of I. Foster literally just said after committing that part of his reasoning for picking the Clowns was that they have put people into the NBA.
It's great that Fran has gotten this team to preform as well as they have but if potential high level recruits dont respect the guy as a coach then how is he supposed to get the talent needed that can compete for a championship on the team?
NorthKCHawk
Well-Known Member
One of the things I appreciated about Coach Fry stories is how he shunned dirty boosters and paying players, and he tried to run a clean ship. By all accounts, Fran does not pay for players, which means he is not going to land the 1 and done guys that are bought and paid for by dirty coaches like Bill Self.
Fran recruits guys he can get and coaches them up. He runs a clean program. He plays a reasonably exciting brand of basketball. He does not just speak in coach speak. He is not boring on the sideline. I can live with all that.
Fran recruits guys he can get and coaches them up. He runs a clean program. He plays a reasonably exciting brand of basketball. He does not just speak in coach speak. He is not boring on the sideline. I can live with all that.
NikeHawk21
Well-Known Member
I don’t completely disagree, however there has to be a little understanding that the making the NBA is significantly lower odds than the NFL. As I noted there are way more D1 teams, only 30 NBA teams, and players in the NBA play much longer careers than NFL players do. Lastly and probably the biggest thing is basketball has many many more international players that further lower the odds.
Would it be nice to produce some more NBA talent? Sure, but it’s not the biggest thing. You can build a strong COLLEGE basketball team with 4 year guys too.
InGoodCo
Well-Known Member
This - also, Fran's rate of turning guys from low star recruits into professionals is pretty high. A lot of his kids are being paid to play basketball at some level. I feel like that became a "thing" the minute Fran walked in the door. It might not be the NBA, but Fran is producing a lot of guys who are payed to play a sport they love.
I wonder about if Fran was winning more and still not putting many players in the pros if that'd matter to us. I mean I don't think there's any in the NBA now is there? Just the G league or whatever it is. Lets say we were getting to the sweet 16 and sneaking into the elite 8 now and then with same group of guys that just aren't going to be NBA players is that still a nock on him? It almost seems like he's getting what he can out of who he's been getting. I mean beyond Woodbury who has been a high star stud recruit that's underperformed?
homes
Well-Known Member
I read that and conclude that Fran is a pretty good coach. Looking at the BT records starting in 2010-2011 to 2018-2019, they have finished higher in the BT than the recruiting class ranking for that upcoming year in 6 of the 9 years, lower in 2 and the same in 1. As opposed to football, a great freshman or two can have an immediate impact on a program, so I think it's fair to assess the success of the program in the same year as the recruiting class. Fran hasn't had one of those guys yet, so he appears to be getting much out of the guys he's bringing into the program. Plus, they're not leaving early so they have the opportunity to play together longer, which I think translates into them being better as a team. I wonder if this isn't a lane he's okay being in.
I seem to distinctly remember Fran pitching fast paced, offensive oriented basketball when he was hired. Here's the clip for those who want a refresher:
He really hasn't changed his philosophy in the past decade, perhaps refined it, but the man is who he is. He has accomplished most of what he set out to do in that initial press conference, but the challenging thing that has evaded him thus far is winning the Big Ten. When he was hired it was difficult and the league has only improved since then with the addition of Maryland and the continued ascent of its top teams. In order to win the league, you essentially have to have a national championship caliber team. I hope Garza and Wieskamp stay, because with Bohannon back next year combined with a year of seasoning for our young guards and improved depth elsewhere, I really think that's where we could be. Fran is a top tier coach, probably objectively one of the top 25 in the country. If you can separate the components, I'd say he's probably top 10 in talent identification and development, but outside the top 50 or maybe even 100 for recruiting. So needless to say, it's rare that he has the horses to really do something. But he may well have them next year and that's damn exciting for Iowa basketball. There's a chance and there's really nothing more you can ask for than that.
He really hasn't changed his philosophy in the past decade, perhaps refined it, but the man is who he is. He has accomplished most of what he set out to do in that initial press conference, but the challenging thing that has evaded him thus far is winning the Big Ten. When he was hired it was difficult and the league has only improved since then with the addition of Maryland and the continued ascent of its top teams. In order to win the league, you essentially have to have a national championship caliber team. I hope Garza and Wieskamp stay, because with Bohannon back next year combined with a year of seasoning for our young guards and improved depth elsewhere, I really think that's where we could be. Fran is a top tier coach, probably objectively one of the top 25 in the country. If you can separate the components, I'd say he's probably top 10 in talent identification and development, but outside the top 50 or maybe even 100 for recruiting. So needless to say, it's rare that he has the horses to really do something. But he may well have them next year and that's damn exciting for Iowa basketball. There's a chance and there's really nothing more you can ask for than that.
There are 30 NBA teams with 12 players on each active roster, or 360 players. There are 32 NFL teams with 54 (I think) active players on each roster, or 1,728 active players in the league. That right there tells you that by the numbers it is much better odds to make the NFL than the NBA.
When the name on the front of the jersey says Iowa, your class ranking will always be lower than what it deserves. I don't really think Fran is better or worse at recruiting than most coaches at Iowa. My hope is that he stays 4 or 5 more years continuing to keep us in the top half of the conference with hopefully a huge year next year. Then with the next coach, maybe we get lucky and find a future hall of Famer who wants to stay loyal to Iowa.
MelroseHawkins
Well-Known Member
But back in the day, Iowa City High had a loaded team with Matt Gatens, AJ Derby, Malcom Moore, Eric Washpun and had Jon Lickliter at the point. What's your point? Just kidding. I get what you are saying.
Amen we have historically been at our best with stud PGs. That's pretty much true for college basketball. BJ Armstrong, Andre Woolridge, Guys like that who have the ball in their hands a ton drive the bus. I felt that missing on the Carton kid was kind of our big big miss.
1977Hawkeye
Well-Known Member
I don't buy that. At all. When you're mostly getting 3* recruits or NR's, your recruiting classes just are never going to be highly rated no matter who you are. Name some top recruits we've gotten whose rankings have dropped after committing to Iowa.. I'm having trouble thinking of any. We have gotten a few 4* guys.. It seems like their ratings stayed where they were after we landed them. And we've had a few guys turn out better than their rankings, but were not heavily recruited to begin with. Aaron White for one.
I do agree though that Fran has done just as good of a job recruiting as his predecessors. Better than Lickliter obviously, and Alford got a few nice players but wasn't exactly raking in the blue chip recruits. There was Tyler Smith, Brunner, Horner, etc. but there were also some JR Angle, Seth Gorney and Alex Thompson types. Like Fran, Davis got some good recruits and missed on others. LaFrentz being the main one that comes to mind, but my memory is starting to get a little sketchy on the late 80's and 90's recruiting stuff.
Last edited:
I'm not arguing that the name on the front of the jersey is the difference between a bottom of the conference class and a top of the conference class. I'm arguing that it always skews it a bit. But slightly lowering our ranking and slightly raising some other teams ranking. Wieskamp is an example. He earned a 16th place ranking before he committed. After he committed he continued to dominate, yet his ranking dropped to the 60s I think it was. If he committed to a big name school, he would have stayed top 25. Do that with 4 or 5 players and it's the difference between a 12th place ranking king in conference and a 7th or so.
1977Hawkeye
Well-Known Member
Are you absolutely positive about that? Or did other players climb and push JW down? Awfully tough to stay at #16 overall. I'm not sure we can assume it's because of an anti-Iowa bias or something like that.
Not saying you're definitely wrong, but these things aren't static. Some players can really blow up and others maybe peak sooner. I don't follow high school basketball much, though, so I can't really talk about why JW might not have stayed #16.
