Recruiting Remains an Uphill Battle for Iowa

[74Hunter]

In looking at that chart I would say Nebraska could be in for a fall. They used to recruit heavily down into Texas, but that was back when they played in the Big12.

I think that this line of thought is highly over rated. We have always recruited Texas, as well as California, and Florida. We have 1 verbal from Texas this year, but we have made up for it with 4 from Ohio and 2 Indiana. We have to recruit nationally, heck in the last 2 years we have kids from CA, TX, GA, IL, IN, OH, UT, MD, AZ, CO, WI, and SD as well as NE.

 

[BSpringsteen]

Boss, you posted, in part:

I don't have a problem with that. However....

The level of consternation that can exist on the message boards and talk radio leads me to believe that a lot of people don't view those schools as anything to compare to, and wonder why Iowa can't be more like Michigan, Ohio State, etc...the blue bloods, who have all the advantages on a year in year out basis.

Folks are expecting more of the latter than the former...and my assertion is it's real, real hard to be consistently relevant with the latter than the former given the inherent recruiting disadvantages Iowa has.

JD - I think that's fair. But what I am saying is that it can be far worse. As a program to build off of, it is worse to be K-State or Kansas than it is to be Iowa. If Nebraska wasn't Nebraska - it would be worse to be Nebraska.

To get at the crux of my point. Do we really think that Oklahoma and Oklahoma State would be perennial powers if it wasn't located next door to Texas? Having Illinois next door and the presence that the school has in Illinois is a huge advantage.

I don't expect Iowa to be a blue blood, but I think they have it much better than you make it out to be. I think it has a great campus with facilities that can compete with the blue bloods. A great stadium, a great fan base, good looking girls, great college town. To say that Iowa has it rough is to have never set foot in a place like College Station, TX or West Lafayette, IN

 

[kuhntz]

The difficulty to get talented players to attend a school has nothing to do with how well a team performs, and ultimately, whether the team is able to win? Really?

If you don't take my quote out of context, no they don't. Recruiting disadvantages have nothing to do with the coaches performance and decision making...

I agree that gameday decisions are not related to instate talent,but performance is impacted by raw talent,and when schools have a talent edge,they can overcome some bad decisions by the coaching staff.
KF has to be right almost all the time to win vs most of the Big Ten schools.
I do agree that losing to Minny must stop!

Agreed JH. The room for error is smaller at Iowa, making it even more important that losing games each year by being out coached has to end.

 

[PatrickAdamovicz]

30 years of sustained success with 2 different coaches. Iowa isn't an elite job but its a damn good one and will continue to be a good program whether Ferentz or someone else is coaching. This isn't the 70's.

 

[Cory]

Talent has not been the problem. Getting beat by better teams is not the problem.

Other schools lose to a team as bad as Minnesota once every five years. Iowa loses to teams like that a couple of times each year.

Agreed. You are dead on sir.

 

[Cory]

JD - I think that's fair. But what I am saying is that it can be far worse. As a program to build off of, it is worse to be K-State or Kansas than it is to be Iowa. If Nebraska wasn't Nebraska - it would be worse to be Nebraska.

To get at the crux of my point. Do we really think that Oklahoma and Oklahoma State would be perennial powers if it wasn't located next door to Texas? Having Illinois next door and the presence that the school has in Illinois is a huge advantage.

I don't expect Iowa to be a blue blood, but I think they have it much better than you make it out to be. I think it has a great campus with facilities that can compete with the blue bloods. A great stadium, a great fan base, good looking girls, great college town. To say that Iowa has it rough is to have never set foot in a place like College Station, TX or West Lafayette, IN

You are also correct. I think there isn't a sane person in here that expects Iowa to be Michigan or OSU. They do expect Iowa to be at the top or near it of the second tier of the Big Ten. Iowa is starting to fall into the bottom half and that has people worried.

 

[BSpringsteen]

30 years of sustained success with 2 different coaches. Iowa isn't an elite job but its a damn good one and will continue to be a good program whether Ferentz or someone else is coaching. This isn't the 70's.

x100000000000

 

[DuffMan]

30 years of sustained success with 2 different coaches. Iowa isn't an elite job but its a damn good one and will continue to be a good program whether Ferentz or someone else is coaching. This isn't the 70's.

Iowa basletball says hello.

 

[hogeye]

In that way Iowa is exceedingly blessed by several factors:

1) The BCS schools in Illinois do not have in state allegiances.
2) Mizzou and Kansas also do not have in state allegiances that are nearly as strong as Iowa's, meaning that it isn't tough to go into the state and pluch out talent. Same goes for Minnesota, and while certainly to a significantly lesser extent, the Badgers will always be second fiddle to the Packers and by a HUGE margin.

So, let me get this straight, Iowa is exceedingly blessed by several (count them, two) factors?

I don't see what state allegiance has to do with anything other than to point out that Minnesota, Illinois, Missouri and Kansas constantly get pillaged by out of state schools because of a lack of allegiance. Which may be true, but all you're proving at the end of the day is that Iowa isn't getting pillaged because there is nothing to pillage.

If anything, you're kind of underscoring Jon's point. And I think both of your points are the same, allegiance.

Which while I could maybe agree that per capita Iowa has a better in state allegiance, I could certainly concede the point for sake of argument, I don't think you've offered any significant reason that demonstrates Iowa being exceedingly blessed in recruiting compared to any other D1 schools of equal or higher level.

 

[BSpringsteen]

So, let me get this straight, Iowa is exceedingly blessed by several (count them, two) factors?

I don't see what state allegiance has to do with anything other than to point out that Minnesota, Illinois, Missouri and Kansas constantly get pillaged by out of state schools because of a lack of allegiance. Which may be true, but all you're proving at the end of the day is that Iowa isn't getting pillaged because there is nothing to pillage.

If anything, you're kind of underscoring Jon's point. And I think both of your points are the same, allegiance.

Which while I could maybe agree that per capita Iowa has a better in state allegiance, I could certainly concede the point for sake of argument, I don't think you've offered any significant reason that demonstrates Iowa being exceedingly blessed in recruiting compared to any other D1 schools of equal or higher level.

You are way off here.

Take Nebraska. What if that wasn't a national brand? What if they had to rely on regional recruiting? They would be bordered by such populous places as Iowa, South Dakota, Colorado, and Kansas.

Take Kansas or K-State. Look at who borders them.

The state of Illinois is a recruiting factory and there isn't a state school that builds allegiance to their players. If you don't think that Iowa being a border state and being very familiar to high school students in Illiinois doesn't give them an assist, I'd say you need to go back to the drawing board.

Bottom line is that Iowa and WIsconsin are able to go into Illinois, Minnesota, and Missouri as effectively as the in-state schools can.

Add to this the idea that Ohio State can't offer every kid in the state a schollie, and you have a ton of talent in your recruiting region.

This has been proven time and time again by the fact that Iowa can and has pulled top 25 recruiting classes, something that I think will happen more now with the new staff.

There are disadvantages because of the lack of in-state talent sure, but Iowa isn't some impoverished welfare case that's lucky to eat at night, and that's how Jon makes it sound.

 

[ssckelley]

I think that this line of thought is highly over rated. We have always recruited Texas, as well as California, and Florida. We have 1 verbal from Texas this year, but we have made up for it with 4 from Ohio and 2 Indiana. We have to recruit nationally, heck in the last 2 years we have kids from CA, TX, GA, IL, IN, OH, UT, MD, AZ, CO, WI, and SD as well as NE.

You have to recruit nationally as there is not enough talent in the state of Nebraska to field a team with, Iowa has the same issues. But you cannot say that moving to the B1G has not hurt Nebraska recruiting Texas. Your coaches are reaching into other areas of the country because they have to. Nebraska will remain competitive as you have to much prestige to fall to far and your facilities is top notch.

 

[1977Hawkeye]

I don't disagree with any of the discussion about Iowa's built-in recruiting disadvantages because of it being a low population state. It's obvious that Iowa doesn't have an in-state hotbed of talent to recruit from, but has to, and DOES recruit nationally. I don't expect to be Ohio State, Alabama, etc. where we go 11-1 every year.

But what burns me is that when we have a string of 6-6 or 7-5 type seasons, and people start complaining about it, there is the other crowd that chimes in and says "What do you expect? We are IOWA." I think that's nonsense - Iowa has proven multiple times in the past 30 years that it can be a better program than that. Just look at the 1980's and a good portion of the 2000's.

And as others have said, just take care of business against teams like ISU, Minny and NW and we are suddenly a 9-3 program instead of 7-5. I would be plenty happy to be 9-3.

 

[ssckelley]

1977, because of the recruiting disadvantages we will have to endure a few 6-6 and 7-5 teams along the way. At no point in the past 30 years has Iowa been able to avoid them, all it takes is one bad recruiting class (see 2009) and mediocrity sets in. The only teams that can consistently hit 9/10 wins per season are the ones that sit in the recruiting hot beds. If I was a Texas or Florida State fan a 6 or 7 win season would be unacceptible.

 

[hogeye]

You are way off here.

Take Nebraska. What if that wasn't a national brand? What if they had to rely on regional recruiting? They would be bordered by such populous places as Iowa, South Dakota, Colorado, and Kansas.

Take Kansas or K-State. Look at who borders them.

The state of Illinois is a recruiting factory and there isn't a state school that builds allegiance to their players. If you don't think that Iowa being a border state and being very familiar to high school students in Illiinois doesn't give them an assist, I'd say you need to go back to the drawing board.

I didn't say it didn't give them an assist, but giving them an assist is a far cry from being exceedingly blessed.

Bottom line is that Iowa and WIsconsin are able to go into Illinois, Minnesota, and Missouri as effectively as the in-state schools can.

Add to this the idea that Ohio State can't offer every kid in the state a schollie, and you have a ton of talent in your recruiting region.

This has been proven time and time again by the fact that Iowa can and has pulled top 25 recruiting classes, something that I think will happen more now with the new staff.

There are disadvantages because of the lack of in-state talent sure, but Iowa isn't some impoverished welfare case that's lucky to eat at night, and that's how Jon makes it sound.

Well, first off I think you're making Jon's stance sound worse than it is at face value. The simple fact is that recruiting is an uphill battle for Iowa and always has been and will remain so.

I don't agree with your take in whole, but we can disagree and leave it that. In a nutshell, you're mostly right in some ways, but by the same token it's not just Iowa getting those advantages you mentioned. We're talking Iowa-specific advantages and you've yet to list one that gives only Iowa anything to be exceedingly blessed about in terms of recruiting.

If you want one, I'll give you one, NFL player development. That is something that Iowa has stamped on the program that not as many comparable programs can offer.

Outside of that, next time you're in Iowa City look around and tell me what takes the average top talented recruit and attracts them there rather than Southern Cal, Florida or other states with more scenery (and I mean that in more ways than one).

When what you have to offer is an old school, pro style head coach that will discipline and you don't have a national branding or location that's overly appealing, you have an uphill battle in recruiting. That's the bottom line.

 

[SpiderRico]

There are 385 FBS level recruits within a 500 mile radius of Iowa City. There are 819 recruits within a 500 mile radius of Jacksonville Florida (heck, there's 344 just in the state of Florida). Couple that with the rampant oversigning that the SEC does, where if they miss on a kid, they just jettison his scholarship and you can see what kind of uphill climb it is for Iowa.

Given that, I still go back to the late 1950's and if Iowa would have played it's cards right, we would have been the Nebraska of the Midwest instead of Nebraska. Oh well.

 

[DodgerHawki]

So the extent of our "advantage"...

You are way off here.

Take Nebraska. What if that wasn't a national brand? What if they had to rely on regional recruiting? They would be bordered by such populous places as Iowa, South Dakota, Colorado, and Kansas.

Take Kansas or K-State. Look at who borders them.

The state of Illinois is a recruiting factory and there isn't a state school that builds allegiance to their players. If you don't think that Iowa being a border state and being very familiar to high school students in Illiinois doesn't give them an assist, I'd say you need to go back to the drawing board.

Bottom line is that Iowa and WIsconsin are able to go into Illinois, Minnesota, and Missouri as effectively as the in-state schools can.

Add to this the idea that Ohio State can't offer every kid in the state a schollie, and you have a ton of talent in your recruiting region.

This has been proven time and time again by the fact that Iowa can and has pulled top 25 recruiting classes, something that I think will happen more now with the new staff.

There are disadvantages because of the lack of in-state talent sure, but Iowa isn't some impoverished welfare case that's lucky to eat at night, and that's how Jon makes it sound.

is that we border Illinois? Yes, we recruit Illinois well, but I don't think you can make the case we recruit the state of Illinois as effectively as the home state school. Lots of schools recruit Illinois well, Iowa gets its share, but certainly not anywhere near everyone we would want. And Iowa certainly does not recruit Missouri better than Missouri does. Yes, Clayborn and McNutt were from St. Louis, and we are continuing to get a few guys from the state. But of the Top 10 recruits every year in Missouri, Mizzou is getting 7-8 of them.

Look at where Iowa gets its players from. The staff has to take advantage of openings where they are available, and then develop that talent much better than the big boys when those players get on campus. Yes, the state of Ohio produces more players than can go to OSU every year, and yes, Iowa has benefited (Stanzi, DJK, Hyde, Bradley Fletcher, etc.). But would you rather be OSU (which gets first pick of the talent in Ohio) or Iowa (which gets to compete with everyone else for the kids that OSU doesn't want)?

I would argue that from the standpoint of inherent recruiting advantages in comparison to the teams Iowa has to defeat in order to win the conference (Michigan, MSU, OSU, PSU), we are closer to an impoverished welfare situation than not. Yes, the fan support is great and the commitment to facilities keeps us competitive, but that doesn't sway the elite player from California or Texas or Florida or Ohio or Michigan or Pennsylvania to spurn the in-state school and go to Iowa. It just doesn't. At least not in the numbers it would take to give Iowa a talent advantage over the schools from those states. As great as Nebraska's tradition is, they've basically had a decade of being Iowa (and you could argue they've had less success than Iowa in the last decade). Is it that Nebraska's coaches aren't trying hard enough? Or aren't dynamic enough recruiters? Maybe. Or it could be they are struggling with the same issues that plague all teams from states without an abundance of high school talent close by.

I don't think Jon's point is that Iowa is lucky to finish 6-6. His point is really asking whether or not Iowa should reasonably expect to be a team that wins 9-10 games every year.

 

[BSpringsteen]

No but given the investment in the program and the campus situation, I think that it is reasonable to expect Iowa to win 8 games every year, contend for the conference championship every few years and win it every few years beyond that.

 

[ssckelley]

No but given the investment in the program and the campus situation, I think that it is reasonable to expect Iowa to win 8 games every year, contend for the conference championship every few years and win it every few years beyond that.

The problem is these others schools that sit in the recruiting hot beds are making the same investments. Iowa has to make these investments just get themselves in the game and hope the kids come here because they want to play for a coach with a proven track record.

 

[DodgerHawki]

So, in the last 10 years...

No but given the investment in the program and the campus situation, I think that it is reasonable to expect Iowa to win 8 games every year, contend for the conference championship every few years and win it every few years beyond that.

Iowa has won 85 games, won 2 conference titles, and been in contention in another couple of years. So by that measure how if KF not performing?

 

[1977Hawkeye]

1977, because of the recruiting disadvantages we will have to endure a few 6-6 and 7-5 teams along the way. At no point in the past 30 years has Iowa been able to avoid them, all it takes is one bad recruiting class (see 2009) and mediocrity sets in. The only teams that can consistently hit 9/10 wins per season are the ones that sit in the recruiting hot beds. If I was a Texas or Florida State fan a 6 or 7 win season would be unacceptible.

I didn't say NEVER to have 6 or 7 win seasons, I was talking about several in a row. I realize that for rebuilding years and that's ok, I'm just taking about 6/7 wins being the norm. For example, since 2004, 5 out of the 7 seasons since then have seen regular season win totals of 7 or fewer. But some people act like you're crazy for expecting more..