Sad, sad, sad.......

[deanvogs]

I honestly don't understand your point.


Do you really think people are going to try to pick out the sprinkles in the bowl of turds that is Iowa football?

Not surprising, common sense doesn't come easily for some.

Not every story/article has to turn into a bash session. Is that easier for you to understand?

 

[RocknRollface]

There is clearly a relationship between spending and recruiting.

the same is true for most things in college football.

It would probably be impossible to break it down to an equation and it's different for every school but the relationship clearly exists.

Given the poor results in recruiting and Eric Johnson's comments it would probably be a safe to assume Iowa is not spending the optimal amount.

 

[hawkfan340]

I'm not missing anything. We all know recruiting hasn't been good. I don't see what that has to do with money spent on recruiting. Spending a lot doesn't = results (see ISU) and spending little (Wisconsin, or heck Iowa from '99-'09) doesn't = results.

Recruiting poorly is independent of money spent on recruiting

I tire of the bashing as well, but on this point, I disagree. Spend $0 and your recruiting is 0; spend infinity and you've got some inefficient returns. There's an optimal amount out there in that range.

Given the data in the article, we're probably spending too little and the coaches aren't traveling enough. I think the criticism on this point is valid.

 

[RocknRollface]

Not surprising, common sense doesn't come easily for some.

Not every story/article has to turn into a bash session. Is that easier for you to understand?

Actually, taking the negative view is the logical expected conclusion at the end of a relationship gone bad.

It's pretty simple to understand.

 

[deanvogs]

Actually, taking the negative view is the logical expected conclusion at the end of a relationship gone bad.

It's pretty simple to understand.

Well maybe with you. I don't bash on those out of my life or on the way out of my life. If it is over, it's over, and I don't feel the need to take every single things that happens and try twist it an turn it and hold it up as an example of how crappy/bad/awful that person is.

To each their own though, if that works for you keep knocking yourself out

 

[doughudd]

ISU's first string was on par with Iowa's first string in 2014.
Mebe ISU is trying to shore up the second string through hamburger squad members so injury won't take such a bite out of performance?
Like what might happen to Iowa when injuries occur this season? Derp?

Mebe. Derp!

 

[HuckFinn]

While trying to be insightful, you actually miss the entire point. The reason our spending is low has EVERYTHING to do with effort. We are in a low population, low talent state. Therefore, common sense dictates that we should have the highest recruiting budget of anyone. Unlike OSU or MSU or PSU, who can recruit in their own back yard and keep costs down, we HAVE to travel for every recruit. Unless, of course, you have a lazy coaching staff who signs 50% of their recruits from the low talent state of Iowa and then calls it a day. That, by definition, is lazy recruiting when you are desperately in need of speed and skill players that simply don't come from Iowa.

Maybe I was not clear. I am very unhappy with the results of Iowa's recruiting in football. But to simply base our success or failure on money spent in the process may well completely miss the point. Your conclusion jumping is in evidence again when you talk about our coaches being lazy. If my opinion is worth anything, and it may not be, if we turn the program around and win more games, we will likely see an upgrade in our ability to recruit. And, better offense is a big time component, for sure. That better?

 

[RocknRollface]

Well maybe with you. I don't bash on those out of my life or on the way out of my life. If it is over, it's over, and I don't feel the need to take every single things that happens and try twist it an turn it and hold it up as an example of how crappy/bad/awful that person is.

To each their own though, if that works for you keep knocking yourself out

But he's not out.

Everyone is ready to move on but we can't.

I'm not in here starting new topics about Iowa football but I understand why, at this point most are going to view everything in a negative light.

 

[PCHawk]

I tire of the bashing as well, but on this point, I disagree. Spend $0 and your recruiting is 0; spend infinity and you've got some inefficient returns. There's an optimal amount out there in that range.

Given the data in the article, we're probably spending too little and the coaches aren't traveling enough. I think the criticism on this point is valid.

This is what i agree with. Of course I'm smart enough to understand there is a such a thing as stupid spending. If a coach was spending stupidly it would show in the numbers and would deserve some bashing.

 

[doughudd]

I can appreciate the "bash fatigue", fair enough. But you have to admit, those documented numbers paint a consistent picture...and it's one of woefully weak performance for a guy who's the dean of coaches in the conference.

How much increased spending would help is an unknown, money alone doesn't guarantee success.(insert your favorite example here) But you don't know if you don't try. I think it's reasonable to expect leveraging of all available resources considering the results we're getting...and IOWA football has the resources.

Or we could run the stretch to the short side of the field again.

And if Iowa spent double what ISU spent with the same results the same flock would be all over that too.

"Sad sad sad we spend twice as much and can't beat them, a few that's footballs, he makes $4M, won't offer legacy HS'ers, blah blah blah".

 

[docholihawk]

What I find sad is we've landed one recruit out of California in the last fifteen years.

 

[PCHawk]

These are the only facts i need to know.

Iowa needs to spend more than most schools because of location.

Iowa is top 20 in revenue so they can afford to spend more than most schools.

The fact that they're not means one of two things.

The athletic department set the budget too low, or Kirk doesn't have the desire to go out and spend the money. I don't really care which one it is but it needs to be fixed.

 

[doughudd]

There is clearly a relationship between spending and recruiting.

the same is true for most things in college football.

It would probably be impossible to break it down to an equation and it's different for every school but the relationship clearly exists.

Given the poor results in recruiting and Eric Johnson's comments it would probably be a safe to assume Iowa is not spending the optimal amount.

WTF!? Then explain why Wisconsin has won more than double the games, 50 games, the last five years while ISU has won only 22 while spending less than half of what ISU did?

 

[RocknRollface]

And if Iowa spent double what ISU spent with the same results the same flock would be all over that too.

"Sad sad sad we spend twice as much and can't beat them, a few that's footballs, he makes $4M, won't offer legacy HS'ers, blah blah blah".

And?

 

[RocknRollface]

WTF!? Then explain why Wisconsin has won more than double the games, 50 games, the last five years while ISU has won only 22 while spending less than half of what ISU did?

You must have not understood what I said.

I said there is a relationship, I did not say I knew exactly what it was.

Obviously you have to spend an amount of money. Travel = money spent.

 

[CPHAWK82]

WTF!? Then explain why Wisconsin has won more than double the games, 50 games, the last five years while ISU has won only 22 while spending less than half of what ISU did?

It's because half of Wisconsin's team is comprised of in state legit D-1 players and they're not competing against any other D-1 schools. There's now way Iowa could do that. (although it looks like they're trying with the current class) Iowa doesn't produce enough D-1 athletes and they got the clowns snagging guys like Campos and Lazard up. If you're a school that's in a state with a low population base and competes with another major college in the same state, you should be among the schools spending the most. Especially when the money is more than available. That's just my opinion.

 

[hawkdrummer1]

And if Iowa spent double what ISU spent with the same results the same flock would be all over that too.

"Sad sad sad we spend twice as much and can't beat them, a few that's footballs, he makes $4M, won't offer legacy HS'ers, blah blah blah".

And that would be valid as well.

Not getting results warrants criticism. Not getting results...and the appearance of not using all your available resources smacks of not trying. That's the original point in this thread. One only need look at the next thread down to see that IOWA has the money. So why are we not using it, when we're near the bottom of the conference in recruiting? A guy with KFz's tenure should have a well-oiled machine running with the resources available to him.

 

[uihawk82]

WTF!? Then explain why Wisconsin has won more than double the games, 50 games, the last five years while ISU has won only 22 while spending less than half of what ISU did?

have you ever been to Madison and Camp Randall on a football game day and also at Ames anytime.

There is no comparison. Madison and UW totally rock for football and Madison is beautiful compared to Ames, enuf said. And they have more in-state talent etc so dont have to travel to recruit.

It is amazing that after Wisky's Rose Bowl year in the early '60s their team and most of their athletics went to crap for 30 years. Must have been those hippies like me in the late 60's that did it.

I have only been to Ames for two Iowa games there. Many times I wanted to go up to see games there but mainly to see Nebby, texas, OU

 

[deanvogs]

These are the only facts i need to know.

Iowa needs to spend more than most schools because of location.

Iowa is top 20 in revenue so they can afford to spend more than most schools.

The fact that they're not means one of two things.

The athletic department set the budget too low, or Kirk doesn't have the desire to go out and spend the money. I don't really care which one it is but it needs to be fixed.

You do realize each of your points are opinions, not facts. I'm not saying you are right or wrong, but every one you think is a "fact" is actually just your opinion.

 

[PCHawk]

WTF!? Then explain why Wisconsin has won more than double the games, 50 games, the last five years while ISU has won only 22 while spending less than half of what ISU did?

I know i know! Because Wisconsin is a way better program.