What happens when a developmental team starts out this good?

[sergeanthulka]

One thing that hasn't rec'd much play that I think will begin to next year, after we graduate 3 absolute STUDS on the DL.

Rick Kazienski(sp?) is the REAL deal...It would be an ******** comment to say that we won't miss a beat on the DL next year...but I think people are going to be pleaseantly surprised -- and RK is a big reason why...

 

[CAARHawk]

Anytime you replace a first team all-American, there will be a drop-off. However, it won't nearly be the dropoff as it was from 2004-2005. Coach K is one reason, but we had freaking Ron Aitken back then.

The biggest reason is recruiting depth. We had 2 true freshmen who were expected to play big roles in 2005, behind 2 RS freshmen. We also had 2 unproven young guys at end. It probably ended up messing up the careers of at least a couple of those guys.

While a guy like Davis will get a handful of reps this year, he isn't being expected to be a main contributor. Meaning he will have time to develop.

Face it guys, it is a new era for Hawkeye football.

 

[gralph]

I think for the point the OP was trying to make, a better term would have been "Progressive" in place of Developmental.

Based on how well this team has played this early compared to years past, I cant imagine that we'd be able to improve as drastically as we have in other years...

Hope I'm wrong though. What a year it could be!

 

[hawkeyescott]

I wouldn't classify you as an insightful poster...

Great post, duffman! I just happen to think this week is going to be a defining week. Win, & I'm going to let myself start dreaming a bit.

ISU being crappy or not, that was the best I'd ever seen a KF team play - early in the season or not...

Why the personal attack? Why not debate her point instead? I happen to agree with her also, this team isn't a developmental team, this team has already taken the steps they normally wouldn't have if it was a bunch of freshman and sophomores. Due to the experience this team has there isn't a lot of "development" that needs to take place. These guys know the play book inside and out and they also know what it takes to win.

If this is the best you have ever seen a KF team play this early in the year (and I happen to agree) doesn't that tell you they are light years ahead of previous years therefore past a "developmental" stage? I agree they will get better as the year goes on but that is because of more practice and not developing guys that aren't proven yet.

 

[DuffMan]

We are a developmental team for two reasons.

1) We get typically develop and get much better as the season wears on. While other teams do this as well, I think it's fair to say no one consistently improves more than we do over the course of a year.

2) Most of our players need to "develop" within the system a few years before they are ready to play. Ballad was a TE in HS. McNutt a QB (in fact they said on the broadcast that we have 19 former HS QB's on our scholarship, and 15 of them play something other than QB now). We take 6-5 210 pound HS linebackers and turn them into 6-5 290 pound OL's.

 

[hawkeyescott]

We are a developmental team for two reasons.

1) We get typically develop and get much better as the season wears on. While other teams do this as well, I think it's fair to say no one consistently improves more than we do over the course of a year.

2) Most of our players need to "develop" within the system a few years before they are ready to play. Ballad was a TE in HS. McNutt a QB (in fact they said on the broadcast that we have 19 former HS QB's on our scholarship, and 15 of them play something other than QB now). We take 6-5 210 pound HS linebackers and turn them into 6-5 290 pound OL's.

I'm not disagreeing with any of this, but are we talking about this 2010 team or the program as a whole? As a program yes it is developmental but as far as the 2010 team goes, no they are past a developmental stage as most starters have been in the system for 3 to 5 years already.

Point #1) The 2010 starters are getting more and more responsibility as far as a playbook, they don't need development, they need practice to get better

Point #2) All the players you listed have been in the system for 3 to 5 years now, they are past their "developmental" stage as far as learning new positions.

 

[DuffMan]

One year does not make a program, or change what it is. If it did ISU would have been able to sustain the moderate level of sucess they had under DMac.

 

[whammer33024]

i think we need to clarify something here that i think people aren't grasping. there's a difference between a "developmental team" and a "developmental program".

in years past, i absolutely agree we have been a developmental TEAM for the most part. we have to throw guys onto the field that dont' have a lot of experience, therefore they get better as the season goes on.

however, this year we have more depth than we know what to do with. it really is an amazing thing and could mean great things for this season. this is where i think we have transformed into a developmental PROGRAM. we have guys waiting in the shadows that get some reps during games but aren't expected to be huge contributors yet. they have the opportunity to go through a couple years of development before they're actually expected to be big time contributors. that's HUGE.

aside from getting 5-star recruits, i feel IOWA is on the same level as all the top schools in this aspect

 

[HawkeyeMike23]

We are a developmental team for two reasons.

1) We get typically develop and get much better as the season wears on. While other teams do this as well, I think it's fair to say no one consistently improves more than we do over the course of a year.

2) Most of our players need to "develop" within the system a few years before they are ready to play. Ballad was a TE in HS. McNutt a QB (in fact they said on the broadcast that we have 19 former HS QB's on our scholarship, and 15 of them play something other than QB now). We take 6-5 210 pound HS linebackers and turn them into 6-5 290 pound OL's.

Doesn't pretty much every team need to develop players in their system a few years? There are very few freshman each year that can step in and play big time college football and those guys get picked up by the USC's and Florida's of the college football world, but outside that every program is a developmental team. This Iowa team is possibly the most experienced team Ferentz has had, I think it's possible that it's much closer to its potential already than a lot of other teams due to all this experience.

Also, I think you would find a large number of high school QBs on most teams. A lot of high school teams put their best athlete there so it's not unusual to find converted QBs all over a team's roster.

 

[Hawkchop]

Really? Because we're raking in 4 and 5 star recruits every year, and always come out guns a blazin' in September? Where have you been for the past 12 years?

So 4 and 5 star players don't need to develope? HA. I also like how you say "where have you been for the past 12 years" then later posts state u didn't watch 2002 season because you were too young, which was 8 years ago.

 

[hawkeyescott]

One year does not make a program, or change what it is. If it did ISU would have been able to sustain the moderate level of sucess they had under DMac.

I understand that, but the guys seeing the field and playing the games right now aren't in a developmental stage, the guys getting redshirts and playing in mop up duty are. Big difference between developing the starters right now as compared to developing the guys in 2010 that will be starters 2013.

Your original post was talking about the 2010 team and not the program as a whole. And I'm saying this 2010 team (the majority of guys playing) isn't a "developmental team" or a work in progress type of team. The guys behind them are.

 

[DuffMan]

I understand that, but the guys seeing the field and playing the games right now aren't in a developmental stage, the guys getting redshirts and playing in mop up duty are. Big difference between developing the starters right now as compared to developing the guys in 2010 that will be starters 2013.

Your original post was talking about the 2010 team and not the program as a whole. And I'm saying this 2010 team (the majority of guys playing) isn't a "developmental team" or a work in progress type of team. The guys behind them are.

We have 3 first time starters on the Oline, and 3 first time starters at linebacker. You don't think those guys are developing and going to get better?

 

[JHHawk]

You know the old saying...things are usually not as good as it seems when you are riding high ,nor as bad as it seems when times are hard.

I am optimistic,but realistic. In college football, there is no margin for error,injuries or just bad bounces of the ball. I remember the undefeated #1 1985 Iowa team going into Columbus to play a mediocre OSU team,having a bad rainstorm hit at game time,and the wind went out of the Hawks sails very quickly.
I like our team so far, but you can have everything in place ,then a dirty hit by a Fitz-trained NW contract hitman can take down your Shonn Greene or Ricky Stanzi and it all collapses. Sorry, but at Iowa, I hope for the best,but brace for the worst.

 

[CAARHawk]

Duff:

You are using equivocation here. You can't vacillate between talking about a developmental program overall and a team that develops during the season. Your original post was about the team being developmental within the season and how that would impact this season.

TO QUOTE EXACTLY, (“developmental”. That is they tend to get better as the year goes on.) That is your definition and it is perfectly clear.

This means you are talking about in-season development of players.

Then when people made valid arguments about how this team is somewhat different than prior Hawk teams, you switched to talking about long term development of players.

Sure Ballard and McNutt switched positions. But that has nothing to do with how much they will progress during THIS year.

Dude, we all agree that Iowa recruits players based on potential. Often this means that they end up taking a little time to develop physically and find their position. The difference this year is that the players have already gone through this process before being pressed into service.

So, we don't have guys like Kanellis playing before they are ready to contribute, or even possibly before they find their correct position. We don't have guys like Tillison playing safety when their natural position is linebacker. We don't have to start undersized converted RS freshmen linebackers at DT. We don't have to start freshmen wide receivers before they are mature enough to be leaders. And on and on.

 

[sergeanthulka]

Why the personal attack? Why not debate her point instead? I happen to agree with her also, this team isn't a developmental team, this team has already taken the steps they normally wouldn't have if it was a bunch of freshman and sophomores. Due to the experience this team has there isn't a lot of "development" that needs to take place. These guys know the play book inside and out and they also know what it takes to win.

If this is the best you have ever seen a KF team play this early in the year (and I happen to agree) doesn't that tell you they are light years ahead of previous years therefore past a "developmental" stage? I agree they will get better as the year goes on but that is because of more practice and not developing guys that aren't proven yet.

1.) It was in no way a 'personal attack'. An unsupported assertion received what it deserved. Her post lacked support & I simply stated such.

2.) Farmgirl has been a flamer for in excess of one year that I have been acquainted with her posts.

The point is, for anyone paying attention, that KF's teams have always been 'developmental teams', HISTORICALLY. i.e. they are better at the end of the year than at the beginning. We typically look out of sync for the first third of the season and play with considerably better continuity & execution over the last third.

So, as to the OP's point, if we consider the typical 'development' of a KF team over the course of a season...it is pretty exciting to think about where this team could be in November, because we've really never seen a KF team this sharp in September.

Now, it's possible that others could turn out to be correct. Maybe this team - because of returning experience - could already be playing closer to thrir peak...Though I would argue that we've had examples of teams with comparable numbers of returning experience that still struggled in the early-season. And, truth be told, we only have 2 returning contributors on the OL, which is usually (aside from QB) the most important indicator of early season success/continuity...This line is already playing at a level higher than last years - more experienced & more highly touted - line. That could make for some really exciting things ahead.

I'm going to reserve judgement until after this week, however. Win this week, & I'm going to start letting my mind think about what 12-0 might actually look like...

But to farmgirl, I will offer no apology. My observation has been that her only purpose here is to flame & stir the pot. We'd be better off without her around, imo...

 

[Scooter]

1.) It was in no way a 'personal attack'. An unsupported assertion received what it deserved. Her post lacked support & I simply stated such.

2.) Farmgirl has been a flamer for in excess of one year that I have been acquainted with her posts.

The point is, for anyone paying attention, that KF's teams have always been 'developmental teams', HISTORICALLY. i.e. they are better at the end of the year than at the beginning. We typically look out of sync for the first third of the season and play with considerably better continuity & execution over the last third.

So, as to the OP's point, if we consider the typical 'development' of a KF team over the course of a season...it is pretty exciting to think about where this team could be in November, because we've really never seen a KF team this sharp in September.

Now, it's possible that others could turn out to be correct. Maybe this team - because of returning experience - could already be playing closer to thrir peak...Though I would argue that we've had examples of teams with comparable numbers of returning experience that still struggled in the early-season. And, truth be told, we only have 2 returning contributors on the OL, which is usually (aside from QB) the most important indicator of early season success/continuity...This line is already playing at a level higher than last years - more experienced & more highly touted - line. That could make for some really exciting things ahead.

I'm going to reserve judgement until after this week, however. Win this week, & I'm going to start letting my mind think about what 12-0 might actually look like...

But to farmgirl, I will offer no apology. My observation has been that her only purpose here is to flame & stir the pot. We'd be better off without her around, imo...

You say it wasn't a personal attack and then you call her a flamer? You sir, are an idiot.

 

[sergeanthulka]

Yes, I don't consider 'flamer' to be a personal attack -- unless it was meant to call someone gay....

A personal attack would be if I were to, for example, point out that your mother was never married...or that you breathe with your mouth open...

 

[hawkeyescott]

We have 3 first time starters on the Oline, and 3 first time starters at linebacker. You don't think those guys are developing and going to get better?

We are just going to have to agree to disagree, your idea of developing and mine are different I guess. I don't consider guys that have been in the system for 3 or 4 years that even though they are first time starters need more development, but that they need more practice to get better. I guess we could agree on saying practice and development go hand in hand.

 

[whammer33024]

1.) It was in no way a 'personal attack'. An unsupported assertion received what it deserved. Her post lacked support & I simply stated such.

2.) Farmgirl has been a flamer for in excess of one year that I have been acquainted with her posts.

The point is, for anyone paying attention, that KF's teams have always been 'developmental teams', HISTORICALLY. i.e. they are better at the end of the year than at the beginning. We typically look out of sync for the first third of the season and play with considerably better continuity & execution over the last third.

So, as to the OP's point, if we consider the typical 'development' of a KF team over the course of a season...it is pretty exciting to think about where this team could be in November, because we've really never seen a KF team this sharp in September.

Now, it's possible that others could turn out to be correct. Maybe this team - because of returning experience - could already be playing closer to thrir peak...Though I would argue that we've had examples of teams with comparable numbers of returning experience that still struggled in the early-season. And, truth be told, we only have 2 returning contributors on the OL, which is usually (aside from QB) the most important indicator of early season success/continuity...This line is already playing at a level higher than last years - more experienced & more highly touted - line. That could make for some really exciting things ahead.

I'm going to reserve judgement until after this week, however. Win this week, & I'm going to start letting my mind think about what 12-0 might actually look like...

But to farmgirl, I will offer no apology. My observation has been that her only purpose here is to flame & stir the pot. We'd be better off without her around, imo...

perhaps you should read her second post in this thread before you start saying she made an "unsupported assertion" or that her post "lacked support".

 

[sergeanthulka]

Perhaps she should have included her support in her first post rather than leave us guessing.

But I digress...she and I have a history on the scout site where she's constantly up to no good that shaded my response here.

Carry on.