The "Youth" argument does hold some water

storminspank

storminspank

Justin VanLaere
Some people think the youth excuse is bogus.
Some people think the youth excuse is legit.

I'm somewhere in-between. I think teams can succeed with young talent, but youth talent does take some time to develop.

Take a look at youth Iowa has on its team compared to the rest of the D-1 teams.

Iowa is the 333rd most experienced team out of the 347 D-1 teams.

Teams that are less experienced than Iowa:

Washington State
Central Florida
Marist
Indiana
Liberty
Brown
Santa Clara
Arkansas State
Evansville
Toledo
Florida Atlantic
NJ Institute of Tech
St. Louis
Presbyterian

Just something to think about when talking about youth and how young teams can win. I don't see many teams younger than Iowa doing much right now with the exception of Wazzu.

Other notables that are about as young as Iowa - Kentucky, Arizona, and Oregon. Kentucky has some blue chippers and is playing great BB. Arizona has some blue chippers and is struggling. Oregon has some decent players and is playing decent.
 
Youth doesn't matter as much as talent and chemistry (both players and coaches). I think our team lacks both.

Ask Michigan about how successful young players can be..... :)
 
The youth argument gets real old when kids keep leaving and you perpetually have a team of young kids. And, if rumours become fact, kids may not come here at all.
 
We have one senior who does not appear to be much of a leader and one junior who is a leader but really only has a little over a year of experience himself. Everyone else who has played is a soph or a freshman, and even that is misleading because we had people who played more prominent roles than some of the sophs who aren't back this year and one suspended soph starter who has zero Big Ten experience.

In short, there's no doubt that the youth of the team is a factor in the quality of play.

However, I do get tired of the talk from the head coach implying that "the system" is difficult to pick up. If the damn system is so hard to pick up, get a new system. I see freshmen and sophs playing major roles in other programs and I'm not talking about McDonald's A-A's. Iowa has a history of freshman playing well on many, many occasions. I believe that if you have a system that cannot be picked up by a freshman of average to above average basketball IQ by midseason, you really need to simplify things because the nature of the game is such that you WILL have to rely on freshmen and certainly sophs from time to time.

I heard a quote from Lick today to the effect that "we just can't keep having to learn the same things over and over." I said this of Alford when he made similar complaints about players not "getting it" when he was here: One of the clearest signs of a teacher who is in over his head is that he complains consistently that the pupils just aren't getting it. While that may be true with a particular class from time to time, when the complaint is repeated every year, more often than not a good part of the problem lies with the shortcomings of the teacher. Either the teacher just isn't very good at teaching, or he needs to understand his audience and simplify the material. I'm concerned that we are seeing some of the same signs we saw with the last coach that he just isn't that great at teaching college kids the game of basketball.

I know he's had some significant success in the past. Even average teachers sometimes have a class or two that will excel because superior learners or superior talent can overcome mediocre teaching. But the more we see the same complaints (and results) here over a period of years, the more likely we're dealing with a guy that's in over his head.

I'm hopeful that this will pass and if we can have some continuity in the program for a change from this year to next, one of the factors that has contributed to the slow absorption of "the system" will diminish and Lick will prove himself to be a fine teacher after all. For now, however, the jury is very much out on that score.
 
Last edited:
Well stated Freddy, I agree with most, though I don think Lick will prove to be up for it. There is a reason KISS is often referred to, for Keeping It Simple Stupid, has merit. Start simple, build upon it.

I think of freshmen who have come into IOWA and contributed....Ronnie Lester ( BY Frosh of the Year ), Kevin Boyle, Bobby Hansen, Mark Gannon ( until he got hurt ), Michael Payne ( Frosh of the Year if I am correct ), Greg Stokes to a lesser degree, Roy Marble, Chris Street, Jess Settles( BTFOY?), Chris Kingsbury, Dean Oliver, Jeff Horner, Greg Brunner....just to name a few off the top of my head who played significant minutes as freshmen, and played well.

I am sick of the system excuse, its so feeble, especially this deep into his tenure.
 
#1 Kansas - (3) of top five scorers are underclassmen
#2 Texas - (3) of top five scorers are freshman, with 2 seniors
#3 Kentucky - (4) of top five scorers are underclassmen
#4 Purdue - all UPPERclassmen; IMHO, no chance to win NCAA title
#5 Syracuse - (3) unders, (3) uppers in top six scorers
#6 West Virginia - (4) of top five scorers are underclassmen
#7 Duke - as you might expect, (3) of top five are UPPERclassmen
#8 Villanova - (3) of top five scorers are underclassmen
#9 MSU - No shocker, (3) of top 5 are UPPERclassmen.
#10 UNC - (3) underclassmen in top 5 scorers


- So, looking at this list you will see:

(7) - Number of teams in top 10 with UNDERclassmen leading the way
(3) - with UPPERclassmen at the helm

Also, (2) of the top three teams are led in scoring by...drumroll, please....a FRESHMAN.
- Look deeper and you will see that, perhaps, just one of the (3) teams with UPPERclassmen leaders has a legit chance at winning a title. The only reason I think MSU has that chance is because of their coach. Purdue will fold like usual. And, I just do not think the Heels have the horses to get it done this year. But, in 2011, watch out or the baby blue-ers.

Youth makes a difference. Yes. But, talent makes the biggest difference.

And, at Iowa, we do not get 'the talent' to make that big of a difference anymore. Raveling's ability to recruit was the only reason we were so good in the mid-late 80s.
 
HeneryHawk said:
The youth argument gets real old when kids keep leaving and you perpetually have a team of young kids. And, if rumours become fact, kids may not come here at all.
Click to expand...
Yep. I think of it this way. Iowa is looking at basically 4 straight years of youth movement. Most teams when they are young have a year or two of a youth movement. If this trend keeps up, Iowa will never have anything to build on because they are always inexperienced. I hope Iowa is done being a young team after next year. If the roster stops having so much turnover Iowa will have a fairly veteran.

2011/2012
Gatens Sr.
Tucker Sr.
Archie Sr.
Brommer Sr.
May Jr.
Cougs. Jr.
Payne Jr.
Larsen Soph.
McCabe Soph.
Brust Soph.
Marble Soph.

I know probably 0% chance of that happening, but that team would be pretty experienced and could be very tough. Probably another PG and big guy away from being REALLY good. Hopefully the new guys will pan out and Lick can keep everyone in the fold.
 
Stuka said:
Yep. I think of it this way. Iowa is looking at basically 4 straight years of youth movement. Most teams when they are young have a year or two of a youth movement. If this trend keeps up, Iowa will never have anything to build on because they are always inexperienced. I hope Iowa is done being a young team after next year. If the roster stops having so much turnover Iowa will have a fairly veteran.

2011/2012
Gatens Sr.
Tucker Sr.
Archie Sr.
Brommer Sr.
May Jr.
Cougs. Jr.
Payne Jr.
Larsen Soph.
McCabe Soph.
Brust Soph.
Marble Soph.

I know probably 0% chance of that happening, but that team would be pretty experienced and could be very tough. Probably another PG and big guy away from being REALLY good. Hopefully the new guys will pan out and Lick can keep everyone in the fold.
Click to expand...

That team might be tough in the MVC...
 
HeneryHawk said:
The youth argument gets real old when kids keep leaving and you perpetually have a team of young kids. And, if rumours become fact, kids may not come here at all.
Click to expand...

+1

When a coach is in year 3 he really shouldn't have the 333rd youngest team in the nation unless he inherited a team full of juniors and seniors, which Lick didn't.
 
storminspank said:
Some people think the youth excuse is bogus.
Some people think the youth excuse is legit.

I'm somewhere in-between. I think teams can succeed with young talent, but youth talent does take some time to develop.

Take a look at youth Iowa has on its team compared to the rest of the D-1 teams.
Click to expand...

You'd have more compelling argument (or at least you'd get more sympathy) if we hadn't had such a high number of defections in past years.

I'd argue our youth isn't the issue. It's a symptom of bigger issue(s).
 
Yeah, like I said, I am somewhere in the middle. I think the youth issue shouldn't be dismissed, but it can't be something you hang your hat on. And as others have posted, if players didn't leave, youth wouldn't be an issue.
 
Re: The "Youth" argument does hold some water

HeneryHawk said:
The youth argument gets real old when kids keep leaving and you perpetually have a team of young kids. And, if rumours become fact, kids may not come here at all.
Click to expand...

Agree 100%. If you aren't going to consistently land top 100 kids then you are going to have to beat teams with superior coaching and experience and total buy in. That takes time to build. You don;t have room for transfers or legal transgressions. They've happened in some way shape or form all 3 years now for Lick. Like it or not, but the Peterson and Kelly transfers set the program back a year. Not because of talent, although I liked certain things they brought to the team. It was because of the experience they would have brought to the team. I still think the trio of Cole, Kelly, and Peterson would have been a nice foundation.

At some point all that will need to settle down and the guys are just going to have to dig in and play and keep getting better. If we can only lose Bawinkle and replace him with the 4 solid freshmen coming in, THEN I think we can start talking about turning the corner because face it, we're not there yet.
________
Live sex webshows
 
Last edited:
AZmess said:
Agree 100%. If you aren't going to consistently land top 100 kids then you are going to have to beat teams with superior coaching and experience and total buy in. That takes time to build. You don;t have room for transfers or legal transgressions. They've happened in some way shape or form all 3 years now for Lick. Like it or not, but the Peterson and Kelly transfers set the program back a year. Not because of talent, although I liked certain things they brought to the team. It was because of the experience they would have brought to the team. I still think the trio of Cole, Kelly, and Peterson would have been a nice foundation.

At some point all that will need to settle down and the guys are just going to have to dig in and play and keep getting better. If we can only lose Bawinkle and replace him with the 4 solid freshmen coming in, THEN I think we can start talking about turning the corner because face it, we're not there yet.
Click to expand...

All good points.
 
No matter how you look at it, this team isn't as good as us Hawkeye fans want them to be. I don't care how old/young these kids are, I just want a tournament type team.
 
Re: The "Youth" argument does hold some water

jparmley3 said:
#1 Kansas - (3) of top five scorers are underclassmen
#2 Texas - (3) of top five scorers are freshman, with 2 seniors
#3 Kentucky - (4) of top five scorers are underclassmen
#4 Purdue - all UPPERclassmen; IMHO, no chance to win NCAA title
#5 Syracuse - (3) unders, (3) uppers in top six scorers
#6 West Virginia - (4) of top five scorers are underclassmen
#7 Duke - as you might expect, (3) of top five are UPPERclassmen
#8 Villanova - (3) of top five scorers are underclassmen
#9 MSU - No shocker, (3) of top 5 are UPPERclassmen.
#10 UNC - (3) underclassmen in top 5 scorers


- So, looking at this list you will see:

(7) - Number of teams in top 10 with UNDERclassmen leading the way
(3) - with UPPERclassmen at the helm

Also, (2) of the top three teams are led in scoring by...drumroll, please....a FRESHMAN.
- Look deeper and you will see that, perhaps, just one of the (3) teams with UPPERclassmen leaders has a legit chance at winning a title. The only reason I think MSU has that chance is because of their coach. Purdue will fold like usual. And, I just do not think the Heels have the horses to get it done this year. But, in 2011, watch out or the baby blue-ers.

Youth makes a difference. Yes. But, talent makes the biggest difference.

And, at Iowa, we do not get 'the talent' to make that big of a difference anymore. Raveling's ability to recruit was the only reason we were so good in the mid-late 80s.
Click to expand...

I dont think its realistic to expect Raveling type of recruiting. But I do think its realistic to expect Mr. Davis type of recruiting. Theres no reason why 1 top 150 kid cant be in every class (or close at least). Because I agree we're going to need an upgrade in talent. Thats #1.

But followed closely is #2 with experience. Iowa is going to have to beat teams with coaching and experience because most nights at best they'll be even athletically (next year going forward). I think its doable. Things just need to settle in.
________
Brunette Webcams
 
Last edited:
Tubahawk is correct...our youth is the direct result of players leaving Iowa every year since Lickliter has been year.

Looking at the lineup presented by the previous poster, what makes anyone think that is a lineup that will win the Big 10 conference championship let alone get into the top 15?

To get into the top 10 or 15 all year long, a team will need to have potential NBA players on the team. Remember, Lickliter has never put a player in the NBA and that lineup is not going to change his record.

Will that lineup possibly get Iowa a bid in the NCAA as the number 5 or 6 team in the Big 10 (a bubble team)--possibly?

Here is the big question IMO--after 5 years, Lickliter has his team fully in place, and this is the best lineup he can manage. Iowa may have progressed to the middle of the pack of the Big 10 at or slightly above .500 AND Iowa is LOADED with experience and that is about the best that we can hope for.

And from the sounds of it, Lickliter would like to really dumb down the preseason schedule because he apparently does not like to play the really hard teams like Texas San-Antonio, Duquense, and so on. So I would look for Iowa to really start scheduling more cupcakes like SCST so that his teams 'will win' more preseason games.

Then Barta and Lickliter can point to a successful 9-3 or 10-2 preseason by beating nothing but mostly cupcakes. Then he can complain about how tought the Big 10 is but even if they lose half of the games they still end up with a pretty good record and Barta and Lickliter can talk about the 'foundation' and how they have 'turned the corner.'

But in reality, even with Lickliter's full system in place, Iowa is nothing but a .500 team (+ or -)and will be nothing more but many Hawk fans will be very happy. they will be competetive against some better teams but they will lose as many as they win or lose more, but Iowa will be a regular at .500 in the Big 10. They will never compete for the Big 10 championship.

And when they lose some seniors, Lickliter can always say, we are young again and it takes awhile for these kids to learn the system...so be patient.
 
Re: The "Youth" argument does hold some water

NewMexHawk said:
Tubahawk is correct...our youth is the direct result of players leaving Iowa every year since Lickliter has been year.

Looking at the lineup presented by the previous poster, what makes anyone think that is a lineup that will win the Big 10 conference championship let alone get into the top 15?

To get into the top 10 or 15 all year long, a team will need to have potential NBA players on the team. Remember, Lickliter has never put a player in the NBA and that lineup is not going to change his record.

Will that lineup possibly get Iowa a bid in the NCAA as the number 5 or 6 team in the Big 10 (a bubble team)--possibly?

Here is the big question IMO--after 5 years, Lickliter has his team fully in place, and this is the best lineup he can manage. Iowa may have progressed to the middle of the pack of the Big 10 at or slightly above .500 AND Iowa is LOADED with experience and that is about the best that we can hope for.

And from the sounds of it, Lickliter would like to really dumb down the preseason schedule because he apparently does not like to play the really hard teams like Texas San-Antonio, Duquense, and so on. So I would look for Iowa to really start scheduling more cupcakes like SCST so that his teams 'will win' more preseason games.

Then Barta and Lickliter can point to a successful 9-3 or 10-2 preseason by beating nothing but mostly cupcakes. Then he can complain about how tought the Big 10 is but even if they lose half of the games they still end up with a pretty good record and Barta and Lickliter can talk about the 'foundation' and how they have 'turned the corner.'

But in reality, even with Lickliter's full system in place, Iowa is nothing but a .500 team (+ or -)and will be nothing more but many Hawk fans will be very happy. they will be competetive against some better teams but they will lose as many as they win or lose more, but Iowa will be a regular at .500 in the Big 10. They will never compete for the Big 10 championship.

And when they lose some seniors, Lickliter can always say, we are young again and it takes awhile for these kids to learn the system...so be patient.
Click to expand...

I dont agree with this at all. I think a lot of what you are saying is what you've constructed in your mind because you don't like our coach.

Just say you don't think Lick will get it done. The rest of the stuff is just made up garbage.
________
Avandia Heart Attack
 
Last edited:
Lick wont get the job done.

He has never built a D-I program ( much less one in the high major category like IOWA ), nor have his assistants. This OJT appears to be a colossal flop, from winning, to implementation of his system, to player retention, to questionable recruiting ability ( not only player quality, but getting the players needed to compete in all positions ), to organizing an effective staff to recruit, teach, assist in building player relationships, etc., and to building a relationship with the fans (fans will support who they like and believe in, a look at attendence isnt encouraging ). The job isnt getting done.
 
All of this doom and gloom. How about we look at ourselves as fans. Maybe kids do not want to stay at Iowa because we (FANS) have never been satisfied. Like it or not we ran Tom Davis out. Everything was, we can never get by the first round of the tournament. We are sick of watching his style of basketball. Why are we constantly rotating new players in as soon as someone gets hot. Everyone in Iowa had all the answers.
Then we ran Steve off. Yes, the Northwestern State game was a huge melt down. However, he had some very good teams. And it was never good enough. Steve was hard to deal with sometimes. However he was a good coach.
Now, we have Todd Lickliter, NATIONAL COACH OF THE YEAR, hello who was more qualified to take over. Take a look at our last two recruiting classes they are as good as we have had for years. With next years good class we will be ok. In no way was Coach responsible for our defections. These students play for the University of Iowa. Is our coaching staff to cater to spoiled 19 year olds who want to be individuals. The coaches are the leaders. They are the teachers.
Seriously lets get behind this coach. Fill the stands, these kids want and deserve to be cheered for. They are working very hard. Let's embrace what we have and make the best of it. The foundation is being laid. The system works and has worked all over the country.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top