Reminder To Those Who Question Iowa's Recruiting

Ott is a great kid and a top athlete.

But your point is what? Ferentz is too picky? We walk away from great talent sometimes because they're not "perfect"?

Sounds like you're veering into survey territory with the "you have to pick one or two, can't have all three" angle
 
Great article, and you are right, we have to be one of the best college football programs of finding guys out of nowhere that contribute in a major way.
 
DJL said:
Great article, and you are right, we have to be one of the best college football programs of finding guys out of nowhere that contribute in a major way.
Click to expand...

Sometimes I'm not sure what to think. Part of me thinks Iowa needs to do this & find these diamonds in the rough & develop them. Another part of me wonders if Ferentz uses "recruiting Iowa is difficult and don't get 5 and 4 stars" more as an excuse. Maybe they just aren't aggressive enough. I hope they just don't settle thinking it's not worth aggresively going after the highly touted players.

Part of me is proud they get players like they do and develop them. The other part of me is envious of other programs that can pull in the 4 & 5's. 4's are obtainable at Iowa such as getting a few of them a year. Mich St has 7 incoming 4's this year.
 
MelroseHawkins said:
Sometimes I'm not sure what to think. Part of me thinks Iowa needs to do this & find these diamonds in the rough & develop them. Another part of me wonders if Ferentz uses "recruiting Iowa is difficult and don't get 5 and 4 stars" more as an excuse. Maybe they just aren't aggressive enough. I hope they just don't settle thinking it's not worth aggresively going after the highly touted players.

Part of me is proud they get players like they do and develop them. The other part of me is envious of other programs that can pull in the 4 & 5's. 4's are obtainable at Iowa such as getting a few of them a year. Mich St has 7 incoming 4's this year.
Click to expand...

Effective recruiting includes both.
 
DJL said:
Great article, and you are right, we have to be one of the best college football programs of finding guys out of nowhere that contribute in a major way.
Click to expand...
While true, it's very hard to find enough of these guys to fill out the roster year after year. A program needs 4* and 5* guys to be consistently in the upper echelon. If the attitude is that Iowa cannot get 4* and 5* guys on a regular basis, then we, as fans, should expect exactly what we've gotten. Some good years, fewer bad years, and mostly years in the middle. It's not a dig, it's just the reality.
 
Considering how much NFL talent Iowa has had over the years, I'm not sure recruiting is really the issue
 
homes said:
While true, it's very hard to find enough of these guys to fill out the roster year after year. A program needs 4* and 5* guys to be consistently in the upper echelon. If the attitude is that Iowa cannot get 4* and 5* guys on a regular basis, then we, as fans, should expect exactly what we've gotten. Some good years, fewer bad years, and mostly years in the middle. It's not a dig, it's just the reality.
Click to expand...

Wisconsin has averaged 3 (4* or 5*) commits a year over the last 10 years and have done very well. Iowa has averaged the same amount over the last 10 years (31 4 or 5* kids for Wisconsin and 32 for Iowa). The problem is people are under the assumption that 4* or 5* kids are sure fire locks, but they are not. Iowa has missed on far, far, far too many 4* kids and when you are a Wisconsin or an Iowa and you are only going to get 30 of them over a 10 year period, you can't miss on so many of them. Here is the graveyard of 4* for Iowa:

Kalvin Bailey
Ryan Bain
Jake Christensen
Alex Kanellis
Cedric Everson
Diauntae Morrow
Brandon Wegher
Marcus Cocker
AJ Derby
Rodney Coe
Greg Garmon
Ryan Ward

When you are getting 0 production from nearly 40% of your 4* kids, that is a problem. Those are the kids that need to be killing it for you.
 
Wisconsin has similar recruiting rankings as us, and yet look at their results. They have a clear strategy with how they recruit and develop.

They are able to get top RB recruits, while we cannot. They do just as good of a job of developing their players for the NFL.

In my opinion, they are the program that Iowa should have been able to turn into after the 2002-2004 seasons. Find your niche, and go for it. Instead Iowa went into risk adverse and we've turned into consistently average.

Again, they don't recruit any better than us. Yet they have so much more to show in results it's depressing.
 
Clark said:
Considering how much NFL talent Iowa has had over the years, I'm not sure recruiting is really the issue
Click to expand...

Yes and no. Look at where the majority of those players play - OLine, DLine, and some DBacks.
While you need all those pieces to be successful, it is not like only having those pieces can carry a team.

We had a string of 4 star running backs commit, but none of them lasted past 2 years of starting. That really could have been a huge swing in recruiting momentum and on field momentum had we been able to get them through school and into the NFL.

We need to start putting running backs, wide receivers and QBs into the NFL more consistently. That will make it easier for us to recruit 4 star kids into these positions.
We have a chance with Smith this year to get him drafted. We have a chance with CJ the following year if he keeps improving. I would say Daniels is the only RB, as of right now, that might have a chance to be drafted, but even that will take two years of break out play from him.

You can develop lineman, linebackers, and defensive backs. QBs, WRs, and RBs need to have more built in talent from day one.
 
hawkdrummer1 said:
Effective recruiting includes both.
Click to expand...

I agree. Like a retirement savings strategy, diversify is the key.

If a team puts all their eggs in a basket hoping for a bunch of 3* to develop and many don't pan out, they're behind the curve and can set them back. It can be a high risk.

Iowa was able to have a hell of a class in 2005 (I think) with Moecki, Christensen, etc., and that didn't pan out as well as many thought it would. So getting a bunch of snotty highly touted players could potentially be problematic as well. could have off-field issues or grade issues, etc..

I suppose you just have to hope the coaches are doing their research and trust that they are picking and choosing the best players, character-wise and decent grades. Some may need more developing than others. I guess a lot of it is making good choices who is worth spending time & $$ in recruiting and who they think they can develop. We all have to remember there is a lot that goes into this process. We are often blinded by the stars besides their names and often may not think about potential academic issues that may need addressed or that could become an issue.
 
GesterHawk said:
Yes and no. Look at where the majority of those players play - OLine, DLine, and some DBacks.
While you need all those pieces to be successful, it is not like only having those pieces can carry a team.

We had a string of 4 star running backs commit, but none of them lasted past 2 years of starting. That really could have been a huge swing in recruiting momentum and on field momentum had we been able to get them through school and into the NFL.

We need to start putting running backs, wide receivers and QBs into the NFL more consistently. That will make it easier for us to recruit 4 star kids into these positions.
We have a chance with Smith this year to get him drafted. We have a chance with CJ the following year if he keeps improving. I would say Daniels is the only RB, as of right now, that might have a chance to be drafted, but even that will take two years of break out play from him.

You can develop lineman, linebackers, and defensive backs. QBs, WRs, and RBs need to have more built in talent from day one.
Click to expand...

I amend my prior post to adopt this more refined position on recruiting. I agree that you can develop talent in the line, but the talent needs to come in at the skill positions. The fact that Wisconsin has done it with similarly ranked recruiting class puts them more in the outlier than in the mainstream. However, what does distinguish them from Iowa is that their skill positions have been better stocked with talent over the years. Melvin Gordon in an Iowa uniform would have led to more wins in the past three years for the Hawkeyes than Mark Weisman (or Damon Bullock, or [insert name here])
 
RocknRollface said:
Reminder to those who don't question it. Look at the last five years results.
Click to expand...
I think player development has been solid. It's the in-game coaching, and overall philosophy and execution that are brutal. That and we need to do a better job of recruiting and developing skill players.
 
deanvogs said:
Wisconsin has averaged 3 (4* or 5*) commits a year over the last 10 years and have done very well. Iowa has averaged the same amount over the last 10 years (31 4 or 5* kids for Wisconsin and 32 for Iowa). The problem is people are under the assumption that 4* or 5* kids are sure fire locks, but they are not. Iowa has missed on far, far, far too many 4* kids and when you are a Wisconsin or an Iowa and you are only going to get 30 of them over a 10 year period, you can't miss on so many of them. Here is the graveyard of 4* for Iowa:

Kalvin Bailey
Ryan Bain
Jake Christensen
Alex Kanellis
Cedric Everson
Diauntae Morrow
Brandon Wegher
Marcus Cocker
AJ Derby
Rodney Coe
Greg Garmon
Ryan Ward

When you are getting 0 production from nearly 40% of your 4* kids, that is a problem. Those are the kids that need to be killing it for you.
Click to expand...

This....combined with 1-2 losses per year due directly to game/offensive management results in what we've seen 3 of the last 5 years.

We absolutely should be able to land 2-3 4ish* per year, maybe a 5* about every few years, but we are never likely to get multiple 4-5* year in, year out. The massive outlier in 04/05 recruiting did nithing, cause the vast majority were a miss or left.

I truly still believe we haven't fully recovered from the attrition/airbhg stint of 05-08.

When you are a development program, attrition is a killer, long term.

In addition, we are no longer "winning a game or 2 we shouldn't " but are still losing a game or 2 we shouldn't.

I have never been happy with 6 wins, and while I can usually accept 7 wins as a minimum, that does not apply to last year or this year, given the seemingly weak schedules, and the way we Gave 2-3 games away last year, and barely beat much weaker teams.

I have gone from very strong KF supporter, defender, apologist, etc etc about 3-4 years ago....then to a "KF's pros outweigh the cons" supporter about it 2-3 years ago....to now " I like and respect the man and appreciate the past, but if he loses to isu and the like again and doesnt win 8 games, gotta go..."

IMO, recruiting, for as very average/below average as its been, is not even in the top 2-3 reasons for our recent struggles. Poor game day coaching at times and attrition has been.
 
HawkeyeWalker said:
This....combined with 1-2 losses per year due directly to game/offensive management results in what we've seen 3 of the last 5 years.

We absolutely should be able to land 2-3 4ish* per year, maybe a 5* about every few years, but we are never likely to get multiple 4-5* year in, year out. The massive outlier in 04/05 recruiting did nithing, cause the vast majority were a miss or left.

I truly still believe we haven't fully recovered from the attrition/airbhg stint of 05-08.

When you are a development program, attrition is a killer, long term.

In addition, we are no longer "winning a game or 2 we shouldn't " but are still losing a game or 2 we shouldn't.

I have never been happy with 6 wins, and while I can usually accept 7 wins as a minimum, that does not apply to last year or this year, given the seemingly weak schedules, and the way we Gave 2-3 games away last year, and barely beat much weaker teams.

I have gone from very strong KF supporter, defender, apologist, etc etc about 3-4 years ago....then to a "KF's pros outweigh the cons" supporter about it 2-3 years ago....to now " I like and respect the man and appreciate the past, but if he loses to isu and the like again and doesnt win 8 games, gotta go..."

IMO, recruiting, for as very average/below average as its been, is not even in the top 2-3 reasons for our recent struggles. Poor game day coaching at times and attrition has been.
Click to expand...

I think the misses that really killed us the last 3 years were Wegher, Cocker, and Garmon. 3 different 4* RB's and we got 2 good years combined from the 3 of them. That should be a run of good/great RB play for 7 years. Instead we are running a FB for the last 3 years, and it just limited us in all sorts of ways.
 
To an extent I can understand not wanting to waste time on high ranked recruits that you will probably miss on anyway. Since we used to win with low ranked classes anyway, I don't think that's the lazy recruiting that is hurting us. Not all 3 star recruits are created equally, and I think Kirk has gotten lazy trying to find the recruits that were under ranked or over looked. He either got too arrogant with his ability to develope players or simply got too lazy. Whichever it was, it's possible to fix, recruit better talent, and not even see it in the recruiting rankings.
 
deanvogs said:
I think the misses that really killed us the last 3 years were Wegher, Cocker, and Garmon. 3 different 4* RB's and we got 2 good years combined from the 3 of them. That should be a run of good/great RB play for 7 years. Instead we are running a FB for the last 3 years, and it just limited us in all sorts of ways.
Click to expand...

Ding Ding Ding! Agree.

Just as Soriono was an anchor for the Cubs for years with his contract, this was an anchor for the Iowa football program and tough to dig out from.

I'm glad the Weisman experiment is over as Iowa's O was very limited. KF should have bucked trend & gone with some young RB's and lived with the periodic fumbles.
 
Clark said:
Considering how much NFL talent Iowa has had over the years, I'm not sure recruiting is really the issue
Click to expand...

Clark, our recruiting is an issue because we are loaded with kids that take 3 of their 5 years to develop and then the can contribute, if they don't transfer away after 2 years. No one is saying kfootball can't coach these kids up, but why not grab kids that that can crack the 2-deeps in RS FR year? But you are also correct that philosophies, game day management and player personnel decisions are also to blame.
"
 
deanvogs said:
I think the misses that really killed us the last 3 years were Wegher, Cocker, and Garmon. 3 different 4* RB's and we got 2 good years combined from the 3 of them. That should be a run of good/great RB play for 7 years. Instead we are running a FB for the last 3 years, and it just limited us in all sorts of ways.
Click to expand...


I don't get why our philosophy is to play rb's on their ability to pick up blitzes and not their running abilities when we are a run oriented team. This kills FR rb participation and, of course, rb recruiting at a much higher level of player. We fuzzed up the Shonn Greene 2008 season from a recruiting momentum perspective.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top