Recruiting - Better than we thought or rankings?

[WinOneThisCentury]

As Iowa has rolled out several new players over the past few years...I'm beginning to think our staff has recruited pretty damn well over this past three year period. When you look at the new players and their early production...I don't think Iowa is getting enough credit.

Think about the new names on defense: Hankins, Colbert, Epenesa, Golston, etc...that are playing well. On offense, you have Wirfs, Jackson, Kallenberger, IKM, ISM, Banwart, Sargent, and Smith all making contribution in their first or second year on campus. There are also several players being talked about that may not get the chance this year...Wade, Doyle, Linderbaum, Nixon, Waggoner, etc.

As they continue to get experience this year...I just can't remember a time when so many young players were contributing and so many in the wings on the verge. Depth has always been an issue for Iowa, but if we lose a player at pretty much any position group...I think we would be fine this year. DT is the only one questionable to me, but there are options there. Right now, I'm struck by the fact that expectations next year will be pretty extreme in my opinion.

 

[ModebaSan]

As Iowa has rolled out several new players over the past few years...I'm beginning to think our staff has recruited pretty damn well over this past three year period. When you look at the new players and their early production...I don't think Iowa is getting enough credit.

Think about the new names on defense: Hankins, Colbert, Epenesa, Golston, etc...that are playing well. On offense, you have Wirfs, Jackson, Kallenberger, IKM, ISM, Banwart, Sargent, and Smith all making contribution in their first or second year on campus. There are also several players being talked about that may not get the chance this year...Wade, Doyle, Linderbaum, Nixon, Waggoner, etc.

As they continue to get experience this year...I just can't remember a time when so many young players were contributing and so many in the wings on the verge. Depth has always been an issue for Iowa, but if we lose a player at pretty much any position group...I think we would be fine this year. DT is the only one questionable to me, but there are options there. Right now, I'm struck by the fact that expectations next year will be pretty extreme in my opinion.

I think you right on! I remember the time when the Hawks were getting largely 3* players to fill their classes and were developing 2* and under guys. Now we are starting to get more and more 4* players and 3* guys are being developed. Plus the overall balance Iowa is recruiting makes it possible that they can actually put the “next man in” philosophy to use without a whole lot of drop off in talent. Obviously experience cannot be taught, only learned. But the talent level has been increasing as of late on the recruiting level. Having new facilities certainly helps. Kelvin Bell is also a step up as a recruiting coordinator. Recent recruiting hauls is the main reason I get so excited about this team and direction this program is going. And its only getting better as more and more high profile players are taking a look at us. It also doesnt hurt beating PSU, OSU, and Michigan in recent years. The game day atmosphere at Kinnick, especially at night, is second to none. Beating Wisconsin this week, at night, with our fans and gameday experience, has got to be a very exciting moment for the recruits visiting for this game. I expect a few more commitments after this weekend.

 

[IowaLawWasRight]

By objective standards, there has been very little improvement in recruiting in recent years.

Every recruit in the current class is just a 3 star. Sound like years past? Worse yet, there is still no game breaking WR committed, despite a glaring need and the promise of instant playing time.

Last year's class did have some 4 stars, which is a move in the right direction, but none of the blue chippers has come in and made a splash, just yet. Petras and Waggoner might turn out to be studs, but the proof will be in the pudding.

Two years ago, we signed 5 two star recruits, along with big time blue chipper Epenesa. That's not exactly raising the bar in the Big 10.

The fact that sophomores are getting playing time is nice, but it's no different than every other Big 10 team. Quite a few teams start freshmen.

In short, we continue to have recruiting classes ranked by the experts #40-45, whether it feels like we have super talented classes or not.

 

[NCHawker]

We're so used to seeing unspectacular and lack luster that when we see someone shine we're nominating them for all conference.... especially away from the line of scrimmage.

 

[MoseSchrute]

Yeah, I don't think we're getting more 4* guys. Mainly we're getting fewer 2* guys and more 3*'s.

 

[vork22]

Defense yes but on offense people are jumping for joy over Juco players. Phil is the key to our overall success. If we had any offense at all we would dominate the West.

 

[HuckFinn]

Yes. We are getting a larger percentage of 3star guys than in the past, with a few recruits sprinkled in that are above the 3's. But, you may need to look further. How many of the recruits, even in the 3 star range, were toward the top of the range? And remember that recruiting is based on the specific needs of the program in any given year. Therefore, the stars and even the recruiting rankings have to be considered in that context. In short, I think Iowa has recruited better players the last 2 or 3 years than previously.

 

[ModebaSan]

Yeah, I don't think we're getting more 4* guys. Mainly we're getting fewer 2* guys and more 3*'s.

It depends on which recruit rankings you follow. Im really not much of guy who cares about rankings, but more of how a player fits into our culture. Overall, I think we are doing better attracting higher level players that fit our profile. I also think the talent level in the midwest is also improving in states that dont normally put out high profile players but still fly under the national radar.

 

[99topdawg]

Here are the 12 2* guys (Rivals) we signed in 2013 and 2014:

2013
Anjeus Jones
Matt VandeBerg
Josey Jewell
Jonathan Parker
Akrum Wadley

2014
Mick Ellis
Josh Jackson
Parker Hesse
Ross Reynolds
Ben Niemann
Terrence Harris
Dillon Kidd

FTR, we signed 2 4* guys in those 2 years: Jay Scheel and Tyler Wiegers.

 

[PCHawk]

There is no doubt about it we have been getting better players the last few years. Probably due to the new facilities. Possibly due to kids finally taking notice that we develop NFL players. No idea why that has taken so long to make a difference other than most kids are dumb.

 

[hwk23]

Here are the 12 2* guys (Rivals) we signed in 2013 and 2014:

2013
Anjeus Jones
Matt VandeBerg
Josey Jewell
Jonathan Parker
Akrum Wadley

2014
Mick Ellis
Josh Jackson
Parker Hesse
Ross Reynolds
Ben Niemann
Terrence Harris
Dillon Kidd

FTR, we signed 2 4* guys in those 2 years: Jay Scheel and Tyler Wiegers.

Parker Hesse came in as a 6’3” 205 ATH. I bet he could have been a very good MLB (in addition to a good DE). He’s all over the field.

 

[ohhawk]

Iowa is keeping up with the trends for the most part.........bolstering their staff with personnel that have exhibited some recruiting successes in their backgrounds much like most programs are doing these days. Kelvin Bell’s efforts are most notable, some other staff contributions have been less significant or yet to be proven.

I see improvement but the overall product looking more similar than not......still developmental, still have exceptions that outperform, still hunt in the areas where local programs are struggling, still struggle at times for skill position talent, and still find ourselves rarely inside the Top 25 for recruiting rankings.

 

[ssckelley]

This is why I keep defending the job Ferentz has done here. Despite all of the recruiting disadvantages Iowa has he still manages to produce teams that consistently reach bowl games and about every 4 years makes a run. Someone correct me if I'm wrong but I believe Epenesa was the first 5 star recruit we've gotten in at least 10 years (anybody remember the "bone crusher"?). Go look at Michigan and Ohio States commitment lists, they are full of them. Heck at Iowa we get all excited if a 4 star recruit comes to Iowa for a visit. I believe the state of Iowa is the 2nd smallest populated state in the Big Ten, behind only Nebraska, and we have 2 power 5 schools in the state.

Iowa's top rated recruiting class was in 2002 (top 10 IIRC), since then they've only had 3 recruiting classes crack the top 30. There is an impressive list of 2 star players that Iowa recruited that went on to the NFL (Spivey, Klug, Hyde, Daniels). If you just looked at our recruiting rankings every year you'd wonder how Iowa averages 6 wins per year, let alone 8.

 

[Jonrn]

Yeah, I don't think we're getting more 4* guys. Mainly we're getting fewer 2* guys and more 3*'s.

I second this, Iowa isn’t landing any more big fish than they normally do, I just think the bottom part of the “Star charts” have been better. The lowest ranked recruits are legit threats to contribute sooner. Instead of long term projects.

 

[racerhawk]

While it will always be a bit challenging to recruit to Iowa for obvious reasons, I'm impressed with what they've been able to do the past couple of years. The overall quality of the classes has improved. Guys are more athletic, and able to contribute earlier in their careers.

There were a few years before that where we had some really rough recruiting classes. Not only were the ratings not so hot, but some of these guys never saw the field. I think we had some misses when we tried to recruit DC and Detroit.

Iowa is hanging out around 40th in the recruiting rankings, and that's...okay. They are recruiting good kids who work hard and stay in the program. I would like to see Iowa get into the top 25, but I think they have to do something like, say, knock of Wisconsin and go to the Championship game now and then. Wisconsin is our biggest recruiting rival. Beating ISU doesn't hurt, either.

As an aside, Kahlil Mack was a 2* recruit.

 

[racerhawk]

By objective standards, there has been very little improvement in recruiting in recent years.

Every recruit in the current class is just a 3 star. Sound like years past? Worse yet, there is still no game breaking WR committed, despite a glaring need and the promise of instant playing time.

Last year's class did have some 4 stars, which is a move in the right direction, but none of the blue chippers has come in and made a splash, just yet. Petras and Waggoner might turn out to be studs, but the proof will be in the pudding.

Two years ago, we signed 5 two star recruits, along with big time blue chipper Epenesa. That's not exactly raising the bar in the Big 10.

The fact that sophomores are getting playing time is nice, but it's no different than every other Big 10 team. Quite a few teams start freshmen.

In short, we continue to have recruiting classes ranked by the experts #40-45, whether it feels like we have super talented classes or not.

If you consider "objective standards" the star rating, you may be right. But, even so, the ratings the past couple of years have been a bit better than in some years.

I don't consider the star rating to be the gold standard of how well a recruiting class has performed for a program. I think you have to evaluate the class after they've played. What did attrition look like? Who washed out? Who was probably under-evaluated and turned out to be a stud, a pro?

 

[99topdawg]

As an aside, Kahlil Mack was a 2* recruit.

Along with that, he had Bill Ennis-Inge as his linebacker coach and d-coordinator.

 

[okeefe4prez]

If you consider "objective standards" the star rating, you may be right. But, even so, the ratings the past couple of years have been a bit better than in some years.

I don't consider the star rating to be the gold standard of how well a recruiting class has performed for a program. I think you have to evaluate the class after they've played. What did attrition look like? Who washed out? Who was probably under-evaluated and turned out to be a stud, a pro?

Holy shit guys, it's HN legend racerhawk. Where you been, man? Did you move to Colorado or are you still up in Madison? I forget.

 

[racerhawk]

Holy shit guys, it's HN legend racerhawk. Where you been, man? Did you move to Colorado or are you still up in Madison? I forget.

Hey! I'm still in Madison with all of these cheddarhumpers. However, I'll soon be moving to Colorado. The I Club there: Hawks on the Rocks!

I'll be at the game Saturday. Cheers.

 

[PCHawk]

If you consider "objective standards" the star rating, you may be right. But, even so, the ratings the past couple of years have been a bit better than in some years.

I don't consider the star rating to be the gold standard of how well a recruiting class has performed for a program. I think you have to evaluate the class after they've played. What did attrition look like? Who washed out? Who was probably under-evaluated and turned out to be a stud, a pro?

The star rankings are pretty decent for individual players, but they're really bad for team rankings. If you're top 10 or bottom 10 it's one thing. But it really doesn't matter at all if you're 25th or 45th.