SIAP - New Commit - Welch

[deanvogs]

Yeah, talented enough to be coached into getting drafted, but not necessarily to win at Iowa. Seen it before, dude.

Listen man, I'm on board with you. It is obvious that at least over the past 5 years this staff has produced an amount of wins that I think is less than the sum of their parts should produce. That is on the coaching. Yet I'm not gonna be down on a kid who signs with Iowa, especially one who has all the measurables as most every 4* and 5* kid at his position.

 

[ArvadaHawk]

Listen man, I'm on board with you. It is obvious that at least over the past 5 years this staff has produced an amount of wins that I think is less than the sum of their parts should produce. That is on the coaching. Yet I'm not gonna be down on a kid who signs with Iowa, especially one who has all the measurables as most every 4* and 5* kid at his position.

Deano, I'm not down on any of these kids. I am not sure where you picked up that I am. But, this class in it's entirety is similar to the past 5 from a ratings perspective. I actually see the talent and potential in these kids, as I have watched the youtubes/hudl videos of each that I can find. But, these kids also look like the development types that will blossom in years 4 and 5 and then potentially get drafted. So, there, again, I see the talent potential. But, this recipe has produced 34-30 (19-21) the past 5 seasons and I'm not going to applaud a continuation of the same model that has produced so little.

I have said in other threads that if kfootballs wins great, let's keep him and keep going. If kfootball changes his stripes to a more "attack" approach, this season, then I can live with 8-4 (even though there aren't 4, or even 3, losses on this schedule) because the ultra-conservative approach isn't winning games any longer and, I believe, hinders or pigeon-holes our recruiting. Changes are needed on game day, but in order for the changes to be successful, we need recruits to be producing by years 2 or 3 and not 4 or 5.

 

[ArvadaHawk]

come on - we've also seen plenty of wins. you can't always have it one way.

Are you categorizing 34-30 (19-21) the past 5 seasons as plenty of wins?

 

[imported_ankle23]

Are you categorizing 34-30 (19-21) the past 5 seasons as plenty of wins?

if we parse everything in life like you are, we could all see the negatives in anything.

we all have one thing in common - a set amount of time here on earth - quit ruining your precious time by complaining about everything - believe me the staff and team aren't satisfied with their results - they have a ton of equity into the program - they want to win more than they have, no doubt.

 

[ArvadaHawk]

if we parse everything in life like you are, we could all see the negatives in anything.

we all have one thing in common - a set amount of time here on earth - quit ruining your precious time by complaining about everything - believe me the staff and team aren't satisfied with their results - they have a ton of equity into the program - they want to win more than they have, no doubt.

Dude, perhaps you might want to not spend your life telling others how to live theirs. Just a thought. And it isn't my fault that 34-30 (19-21) appears to you as complaining. That just happens to be the record our staff has produced the past 5 seasons. If that record is a negative, you should take it up with them.

I see that you like to be the spokesperson for this staff and we should all believe you when you tell us they are not satisfied with their results. Keeping in mind that this staff hasn't reversed the past 5 seasons, on the field, yet, please tell us why they allowed 34-30 (19-21) in the first place. Weren't they unhappy enough after 2010? Perhaps 2012 didn't quite get them there either? Did they finally become unhappy enough after last season? Are you going to guarantee the 10 wins that are on this seasons schedule, for them?

And by the way, you didn't answer my question.

 

[docholihawk]

With this kids speed and athletic ability shown in the long jump if he sticks at linebacker he could be a great one that can play sideline to sideline.

 

[thetrza]

I just hope he doesn't Welch on his commitment.

 

[docholihawk]

I like the looks of our incoming linebackers group.

 

[RADMAN]

He has all the resources to contribute early if KF starts using the best talent and not developing freshman.

 

[DP5555]

He has all the resources to contribute early if KF starts using the best talent and not developing freshman.

This is such a dumb argument. Reggie Spearman had all the "resources" to contribute early as well and Ferentz played him. Look what happened. He was out of position all the time and ended up losing his job and transferring.

I get tired of people acting like it's so obvious Ferentz won't play young guys. It's just not true. There are examples on both sides of it. Some young have played and performed well. Some have been given an opportunity to play and have struggled. Others have had to wait their turn. My point is that it's ridiculous to claim he won't play a young player and if he did then all would be better. That's not always the case.

 

[PCHawk]

This is such a dumb argument. Reggie Spearman had all the "resources" to contribute early as well and Ferentz played him. Look what happened. He was out of position all the time and ended up losing his job and transferring.

I get tired of people acting like it's so obvious Ferentz won't play young guys. It's just not true. There are examples on both sides of it. Some young have played and performed well. Some have been given an opportunity to play and have struggled. Others have had to wait their turn. My point is that it's ridiculous to claim he won't play a young player and if he did then all would be better. That's not always the case.

In these people's defense, they are just looking for a sane reason that talented players aren't seeing the field over guys that don't belong in D1. Not playing young guys is a more obvious and less ridiculous choice than the truth. The truth is age is irrelevant. He always plays the slow, hard working, good story, over the talented player.

 

[DP5555]

In these people's defense, they are just looking for a sane reason that talented players aren't seeing the field over guys that don't belong in D1. Not playing young guys is a more obvious and less ridiculous choice than the truth. The truth is age is irrelevant. He always plays the slow, hard working, good story, over the talented player.

I would agree that if Ferentz believes there is a true battle for a position he will lean towards the more experienced player who is hard working and has a good story over the younger or more talented player who appears to have more potential. I think that's a fair statement to make.

However, there are just far too many examples of young players who display talent early who have received playing time to make your statement accurate. Does the name Mikhail McCall ring a bell? Dominique Douglas? DJK? Those names are just off the top of my head. All examples of players who weren't very intelligent, but saw the field early because of their talent.

 

[PCHawk]

I would agree that if Ferentz believes there is a true battle for a position he will lean towards the more experienced player who is hard working and has a good story over the younger or more talented player who appears to have more potential. I think that's a fair statement to make.

However, there are just far too many examples of young players who display talent early who have received playing time to make your statement accurate. Does the name Mikhail McCall ring a bell? Dominique Douglas? DJK? Those names are just off the top of my head. All examples of players who weren't very intelligent, but saw the field early because of their talent.

I'm not saying he plays a terrible hard worker over a superstar. I'm basically saying what you said in your first paragraph. He leans towards the hard worker with less talent. The only place we disagree is how big gap there has to be before he goes with the talented player.

The other aspect is loyalty to the player who is already starting. The backup has to be WAY better before he gets his shot. That also has nothing to do with youth of the backup but it happens a lot.

 

[DP5555]

I'm not saying he plays a terrible hard worker over a superstar. I'm basically saying what you said in your first paragraph. He leans towards the hard worker with less talent. The only place we disagree is how big gap there has to be before he goes with the talented player.

The other aspect is loyalty to the player who is already starting. The backup has to be WAY better before he gets his shot. That also has nothing to do with youth of the backup but it happens a lot.

Right. Like I said, I know there are plenty of situations where it would have been worth taking the chance on a younger more talented player as well. The only problem I have is when people make blanket statements suggesting Ferentz never plays young guys or absolutely won't play a young guy. That's just stupid and I see it happen all the time. It's frustration that leads to exaggeration. A fan who is tired of Ferentz exaggerates to try to make their stance more credible or maybe just because they feel like whining about something. There's tons of evidence that suggests it simply isn't true. He has taken chances on younger guys and some of them have worked out and some haven't. There are plenty of relative things to whine about with KF and his philosophy. I don't see the need to exaggerate or make inaccurate statements.

 

[PCHawk]

Right. Like I said, I know there are plenty of situations where it would have been worth taking the chance on a younger more talented player as well. The only problem I have is when people make blanket statements suggesting Ferentz never plays young guys or absolutely won't play a young guy. That's just stupid and I see it happen all the time. It's frustration that leads to exaggeration. A fan who is tired of Ferentz exaggerates to try to make their stance more credible or maybe just because they feel like whining about something. There's tons of evidence that suggests it simply isn't true. He has taken chances on younger guys and some of them have worked out and some haven't. There are plenty of relative things to whine about with KF and his philosophy. I don't see the need to exaggerate or make inaccurate statements.

I wonder how many times in 16 years a starter has been dethroned by the backup with no injury involved. When a guy like Fletcher can't even take the job away from a guy like Shada, Kirk has a serious problem with personell decisions. Over the years he has lost so much trust with this that people always assume there's a better option when there is a slow walk on playing. Obviously fans aren't always right but I don't think they're exaggerating to make a point. More so just lost all trust in him. And in my opinion, rightfully so.

 

[DP5555]

I wonder how many times in 16 years a starter has been dethroned by the backup with no injury involved. When a guy like Fletcher can't even take the job away from a guy like Shada, Kirk has a serious problem with personell decisions. Over the years he has lost so much trust with this that people always assume there's a better option when there is a slow walk on playing. Obviously fans aren't always right but I don't think they're exaggerating to make a point. More so just lost all trust in him. And in my opinion, rightfully so.

And I would agree. There are plenty of reasons to have lost trust in him. I have lost trust in him myself. I'm not going to bat for Kirk here. Yes, there are a lot of examples that can be given of players who probably should have been playing over someone else. There's also a lot of examples of players who did play early over someone else.

I do think they are exaggerating to make a point though. If they've watched Iowa football on Saturdays then they know damn well that young guys have played. Whether or not they choose to acknowledge that is one thing, but they have played. Suggesting Kirk won't play young players is absolutely exaggerating because it's not true. It's as simple as that.