Updated: #48 Ranked Class and #12 in B1G per ESPN

Those rankings also do not include the handful of recruits that we've heard about that have signed their LOI to Iowa but haven't been announced yet. Just give it a little time until those are announced and I think we'll be in or near the top 25.
 
BVHawk95 said:
Hayden's classes continually ranked in the same area. It's not a coach problem, it's an Iowa one.
Click to expand...
There are some people on this board who have REALLY long memories when it comes to Kirk Ferentz, but forget things like what you're saying when it comes to HF. I think it's an age differential thing.
 
BVHawk95 said:
Hell, I'm not even old enough to remember Hayden. Certain people just do not like Kirk, no matter what he does.
Click to expand...

Problem is, as soon as you say "yeah, but Hayden was 20 years ago almost" you get blasted by the HFBFF brigade telling us how stupid we are for not knowing that HF was better than KF in every way possible. Apparently Iowa coaching is like Highlander: there can be only one (good coach in the entire history)
 
revkev73 said:
Does Kirk get a bonus for being 12th best or lower in the big ten recruiting rankings?

You get yourself several years of this level and you end up in the Roadstripe Bowl...with another bonus!

You have to love tolerant Iowa if you are in the coaching business...scuffle along, build your legacy, set your next generation of family up for life...
Click to expand...
Whose contracts have incentives for recruiting rankings?
 
You have to be sticking your head up your ass if you can't see that this is a better recruiting class than we have had in awhile.

Petras - 4* QB with offers from Cal, Louisville, Oregon St.
Craddith - 4* MSU, Missippi, Nebraska, UNC, Wisconsin and many others
Waggoner - offers from everyone
Shannon - Arkansas, IU, MSU, Missouri, Syracuse, Washington St.
Plumb - ASU, MSU, Minnesota, Wisconsin
Ince - Maryland, Minnesota, Purdue, Virginia
Evans - Illinois Gatorade player of the year - IU, ISU, Minnesota, Syracuse
Linderbaum - Army AA didn't have more offers because he committed early to Iowa like Wirfs last year
Tracy - IU Gatorade player of the year - BC, Illinois, IU, Louisville, NW, Syracuse
Geil - IU, MSU, Syracuse
Nixon - Bama
Lockett - BC, Illinois, IU, Oregon st., Purdue, Virginia, VTech, Wisconsin
Brents - 4* BC, IU, Louisville, MSU
DJ Johnson - Illinois, IU, LSU, Minnesota, Notre Dame
Jenkins - Early commit
Roberts - Early offer by Phil at CB, he knows CB talent
Doyle

Plus add an ISU offer to every player, because they offer everyone. If you can't see this is a uptick from top to bottom in Iowa's classes you are either willfully just sticking your head in the sand, or you don't follow recruiting.
 
SamBrownlee48 said:
Not really. I'd rather have our class any day. Look at Rutgers and Minnesota. Both have larger classes than us, so their ranking is better for it, but their average rating per player is significantly lower. Iowa's average rating is right there with Wisky, which is where we need to be.

Even if it was a better recruiting service you were quoting, rankings are flawed because they give too much credit for quantity. Iowa didn't need a huge class this year, they needed a high quality class, and, especially with the developments of the last month getting Petras, Waggoner, and Dallas C, Iowa has accomplished what it needed to.
Click to expand...
This is an important point.

Most recruiting sites factor in volume and not just average player ranking. Doesn't really make much sense, but that's the nature of the beast. The only time that volume realistically would be a factor is if it was documented that a program had "X" amount of needs and failed to fill them up, but class sizes vary every year and it's impossible for sites to know what volume "needs" a program has.

This is a solid but small class.
 
This is a good recruiting class, as good as I can remember for a while. Outside of the top 10, I really do not think these rankings are a real good indicator of talent. On the whole I find the coverage of college football recruiting to be an industry on par with puppy mills.
 
On paper this looks like a great class, reading these posts it looks like a great class, so where is the disconnect when compared to other programs? Under appreciated, dissed Iowa?

Understand the numbers signed issue, which is real.

What Iowa really needs are skill players, especially WR, people who can GET OPEN and STRETCH the field...if that is going to be upgraded...well, great news for Iowa!

Oh yah....and if you have said receivers...they need to be used...and actual downfield plays need to be in the playbook...and practiced...and sent through the KF filter...
 
Same story here at Iowa. Don't trust the recruiting rankings, we're much higher than that.. Now if we were ranked higher then by all means trust the recruiting rankings. Excuse after excuse for poor recruiting. Yes, anything outside of 5th or 6th in our conference is poor recruiting when you're in your 20th year as head coach.
 
revkev73 said:
On paper this looks like a great class, reading these posts it looks like a great class, so where is the disconnect when compared to other programs? Under appreciated, dissed Iowa?

Understand the numbers signed issue, which is real.

What Iowa really needs are skill players, especially WR, people who can GET OPEN and STRETCH the field...if that is going to be upgraded...well, great news for Iowa!

Oh yah....and if you have said receivers...they need to be used...and actual downfield plays need to be in the playbook...and practiced...and sent through the KF filter...
Click to expand...

Exactly. Even if KF did land a few playmakers, I seriously doubt he would even use them to their potential.
 
Caddy said:
Same story here at Iowa. Don't trust the recruiting rankings, we're much higher than that.. Now if we were ranked higher then by all means trust the recruiting rankings. Excuse after excuse for poor recruiting. Yes, anything outside of 5th or 6th in our conference is poor recruiting when you're in your 20th year as head coach.
Click to expand...
This
 
Caddy said:
Same story here at Iowa. Don't trust the recruiting rankings, we're much higher than that.. Now if we were ranked higher then by all means trust the recruiting rankings. Excuse after excuse for poor recruiting. Yes, anything outside of 5th or 6th in our conference is poor recruiting when you're in your 20th year as head coach.
Click to expand...

Kennyfromminne said:
This
Click to expand...


These are great examples of people with heads up their asses that I was referencing.
 
revkev73 said:
On paper this looks like a great class, reading these posts it looks like a great class, so where is the disconnect when compared to other programs? Under appreciated, dissed Iowa?
Click to expand...

What disconnect are you talking about? If you mean the ranking itself? It's a couple of things. Volume for one. Schools that signed 25 2 and 3 star recruits will have a better ranking simply on volume. Then there's also needs filled. You can sign all the 5* QBs and RBs in a class, but without an O-Line that won't translate on the field, but you'll have the #1 class. The disconnect you're talking about may simply be that this is a better class for this team than we've had in a long time, and it will take up to 4 or 5 years to see the full dividends paid. Not all of these guys will play right away, and I think you can say the same about the last two classes as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top