What was Fry's record vs ISU? Ferentz vs ISU? Have to remember that Ferentz has also had an extra ooc game to pad his stats of winning yet still averages less. Fry's 61% winning % in B1G vs 53% for Ferentz. Iowa has finished in the top 25 1 time other than the 4 #8 finishes under Ferentz. Iowa finished in the top 25 8 other times under Fry on top of his 2 top 10 finishes including 7 in the top 18 (9 overall with 2 top 10 finishes). I don't care about players' personal records or conservative play or not, it's about wins which Fry led Iowa to more on average. So please show me where Ferentz has Fry beat when it comes to winning.
The Mythical Recruiting Disadvantage
- Thread starter tubahawk
- Start date
What was Fry's record vs ISU? Ferentz vs ISU? Have to remember that Ferentz has also had an extra ooc game to pad his stats of winning yet still averages less. Fry's 61% winning % in B1G vs 53% for Ferentz. Iowa has finished in the top 25 1 time other than the 4 #8 finishes under Ferentz. Iowa finished in the top 25 8 other times under Fry on top of his 2 top 10 finishes including 7 in the top 18 (9 overall with 2 top 10 finishes). I don't care about players' personal records or conservative play or not, it's about wins which Fry led Iowa to more on average. So please show me where Ferentz has Fry beat when it comes to winning.
imported_ankle23
Well-Known Member
you know why evy quit, right?
BTW, you aren't telling me something i don't know. my uncle played for evy. he was a bluechipper himself.
imported_ankle23
Well-Known Member
Results. Ferentz 4 times finished #8 in 10 years. Fry 2 time finished #10 twice in 20.
Quit the ***** and moan fest with Ferentz. Be glad for what we have, not disappointed for what we don't have.
I sat thru the Fry years from 1990 to 1998. I'm sure you were around too. That decade was not pretty. Yeah, the 1990 team was great, and the TD years were good. But overall, check his record out during that decade. Plenty of Saturdays Kinnick stadium was not close to capacity.
imported_ankle23
Well-Known Member
'93 ish.
1990-1998 58.65%, 2004-2012 60.18%, the past decade hasn't been much better considering the extra ooc game. And just to let you know I'm not a KF hater, it could be much worse and probably would be if KF was fired (for at least 2 years). I'm just pointing out that Iowa under KF isn't any better than Iowa under Fry, actually a little worse.
imported_ankle23
Well-Known Member
2009 - the only BCS bowl iowa bowl victory in your lifetime. 100%!!
and i'm not a fry hater, just pointing out to some ferentz haters that ferentz hasn't been so bad. the 'record book' thing is a retort to those guys claiming that ferentz is 'too conservative'. interesting, i think, that 4 separate KF receivers hold receiving records, especially given he follows the 'pass happy' fry.
And to clarinet player re: record v. the clowns. fry had two distinct advantages - criner put isu in the shatter with ncaa sanctions (loss of scholarships) and fry had, i think 92 scholarships at the time (Forget what the number is prior to it being reduced to 85), whereas ferentz has 85. so you could bank more iowa guys, further hurting the clowns.
hawkdrummer1
Well-Known Member
Seems to me that you're the one that's all worked up. I'm just giving you the facts. You're reading a heck of a lot into it that isn't there.
Quit the ***** and moan fest with Ferentz. Be glad for what we have, not disappointed for what we don't have.
.[/QUOTE]
Quit the ***** and moan fest with Ferentz. Be glad for what we have, not disappointed for what we don't have.
.[/QUOTE]
Those were the days. You could hide Alex Karras on an Iowa farm all summer so competing coaches couldn't recruit him. You could get good southern African Americans to come play up north because they couldn't play in the SEC. Good times... But times have changed a bit since then.
OLWPAORWWM
Banned
Are you joking? Iowa's football tradition means exactly zilch the second you leave the state's borders. And yes, Iowa's geographical disadvantage is HUGE. I mean, it is astronomical. It is not an excuse, because I have no need to make excuses for anyone. That is just the facts.
I mean, for the love of God, even when Iowa won consistently, they never constantly recruited well.
Iowa has disadvantages that will NEVER be overcome. That's just the way it is. This is an urban country, Iowa is a rural school. College football players are disproportionately black, Iowa is relatively homogeneous. The national population is shifting south. Media coverage is now nationally based instead of regionally based.
Not to say Iowa doesn't have some good advantages too (financial support, good fans and good stadium, BTN exposure), but "winning consistently" is not going to erase the disadvantages above. They are what they are, and Kirk has, at times, done a good job of turning those disadvantages into strengths.
DodgerHawki
Well-Known Member
Well, in the case of basketball, the guy with his name on the court at Kansas INVENTED THE GAME OF BASKETBALL. Sorry for the all caps, but to just dismiss KU's tradition in basketball is silly. You are correct, everyone has to start somewhere. It doesn't mean Iowa shouldn't strive to become one of the elites in college hoops, but the odds are stacked a mile high against that ever happening.
In both basketball and football, Iowa starts out at a decided disadvantage to some of the teams in the B1G. Those realities exist. Yes, the fan support at Iowa is great, and the university is willing to pay coaches well, etc. But the number of top-flight players within the state's borders compared to the teams from the higher-population states (Michigan, Ohio, Indiana - basketball, Illinois, Pennsylvania) pales in comparison. Ferentz has to be way better at his job than Hoke or Meyer to be able to beat them on the field. Fran has to be way better than Izzo, Crean, Matta, Belein, to beat them on the court. It doesn't mean Iowas should give up and roll over. It just means we should recognize that competing for and winning a conference title in football or basketball is very difficult. And winning more isn't just a matter of "trying harder" or "just getting it done" or whatever. It takes hard work, smarts and yes, some luck/good fortune.
KF will get another year or two to see if he can get the program back to where it can compete for and win conference titles. If he doesn't, someone else will get the chance. In KF's favor: he's done it before, he understands Iowa, likes Iowa and doesn't appear to have lost his passion for coaching. Against KF: it's been 4 years since Iowa competed for a title (one could argue 2010 they were in it until the Wisky loss), going on a decade since Iowa won a title, trendline the last few years is not positive. I'm interested to see how it plays out. It appears KF's future is tied to the ability of Greg Davis to field an effective offense, which doesn't give me a warm fuzzy feeling. But this year will tell us a lot about how that will go. And if the offense is abysmal yet again, KF deserves the blame for choosing Davis as his coordinator.
The whole recruiting disadvantage thing is a big wedge in the fanbase. Some see it as the reason it's not reasonable to expect Iowa to compete/win conference titles like OSU/Michigan do in football, and like OSU/Indiana/MSU in basketball. Others see it as an "excuse." Probably not going to change minds on either side of the argument.
I see what you're both saying, however, I still disagree. Not sure why you would believe that just bringing in better coaches at the high school level will somehow make more Iowa HS kids into D1 players.
tubahawk
Well-Known Member
It would bring tons of value. Look at Aplington - Parkersburg. They used to be a great recruiting spot. It wasn't the towns water supply that created the talent, is was a darn good coach.
Using my pitiful-self as an example, in the early 90's I played football 4 years in high school 3 at the varsity level. I learned more about the nuances of the game after high school than I did when I was being coached. Additionally we never had a formal weight training program or study any film. Technique was barely taught. Mainly we ran plays against the other squad and some conditioning drills.
Based on conversations I've had with parents still in the Des Moines Metro, the standards haven't increased much from when I played.
tuba, I agree that coaching isn't that great in the Metro area. However, Aplington - Parkersburg was in a league of their own. However, my issue is that just because you have better coaching doesn't neccessarily mean that it will make more players into D1 players. That would mean that the talent is there but that the coaches in place aren't getting these players to reach their potential. In my opinion that if the players in the Metro area high schools had D1 talent, they would still be getting noticed and recruited. I don't believe for one minute that a better coach will some how make the DM Metro area into a recruiting hotbed to help bring better players to Iowa and ISU. Maybe one or two players a year more, but not anything significant. If the talent was there, Iowa and ISU would be recruiting there more. If anything Iowa and ISU have both went out on limbs to find the diamonds in the rough and lowly recruited players as it is, just seems they do it out of state. You don't recruit in-state kids solely based on where they live but how good of a player they are and how they fit your particular schools system.
tubahawk
Well-Known Member
I think we are going to have to agree to disagree but I'll make one more attempt to sway you.
Des Moines Metro has roughly 8200 high school kids and has 0 players currently on Iowa and ISU's football rosters. (Yet Dowling with 1250 students has 4 alum playing for either Iowa or ISU.)
Solon with a school high school enrollment of 350 have 2 players on the Iowa team. Dubuque with about 3300 high school kids has 2 playing on the Iowa team. Then there are other schools like Iowa City High and WDM Valley who consistently have one or two guys on the rosters for Iowa and ISU.
To me that means there is simply no one in Des Moines developing talent. If you figure 8200 kids, with 2000 of them seniors and half of them being male, there are 1000 potential D-1 football players. You can't tell me there isn't at least 1 kid able to be turned into D-1 worthy football player in Des Moines.
HomerChampless
Well-Known Member
What was, for example, Oklahoma State's tradition? Explain Oklahoma State's success in suddenly getting top recruits. And quit making excuses. Excuses are for, you know.
Last edited:
HawkeyeWalker
Well-Known Member
Boone T Pickens can make up for a large lack of tradition. They don't have tradition, but they have huge nearby talent pools and pretty much a blank check. Oregon didn't have any tradition either.
can't cherry pick.
HomerChampless
Well-Known Member
Are you sayin' an escrow of T. Boone's money is used to sway recruits? I thought of Oregon's lack of tradition, but the state has a good number of blue chippers, and the offense is/was sexy. The lack of tradition argument for Iowa doesn't hold water. It does make things harder for Iowa, but not impossible as some losers would claim.
Last edited:
Trevon Young? Just kidding, obviously he had talent but couldn't keep his nose clean.
I see what you're saying but I guess for me, either a kid has size and talent or he doesn't. If he doesn't, he isn't getting recruited, if he does, then he will regardless of who his coach is. His size and talent will handle his business for him.
As for the size issue, how many of those 1,000 male seniors are in-shape, athletic and has the body to play D1 football? Maybe 10-20? For the kids who don't have the body type to play a power position, are they fast enough. So out of the 10-20, how many of them run a 4.3 - 4.5? I do see your point but I don't see how those schools having better coaching is just going to instantly going to put an influx of D1 talent into the system.
