There are obvious reasons why it makes sense that Kirk has trouble attracting wide receivers. Most things about Fran make one think he would be good at recruiting them. But like I've said before, Fran's 3rd highest rated recruit he's landed was a point guard.
Why dont top PGs want to play for Fran?
- Thread starter uihawk82
- Start date
There are obvious reasons why it makes sense that Kirk has trouble attracting wide receivers. Most things about Fran make one think he would be good at recruiting them. But like I've said before, Fran's 3rd highest rated recruit he's landed was a point guard.
Like what? He's struggled to develop a point guard here and has never made one the focal point of his offense to show recruits what they could do. If anything his offense and philosophy sets up to be able to recruit good wings.
InGoodCo
Well-Known Member
Cartwright
MG
Sapp
Bohannon
Connor
it's an easy target for a coach that wants to play position less basketball
InGoodCo
Well-Known Member
I thought you liked Mike?
I did and I do. He was pretty much the same guy from his freshman year to his senior year though and that type of stuff gets noticed by recruits. Think how much success Kirk has with OL because of his success stories developing them, well Fran is the exact opposite at the point guard spot. He has a lot of playing time to sell though but that's about it.
D
DDThompson
Guest
Only when it fits
Well what did you mean when you said Fran should be good at recruiting them? He's never had one be the focal part of his offense, the motion offense isn't going to prepare point guards for the next level and while we do play at times play an uptempo style of offense it isn't like we play super fast. Mike's senior year we were like 150 in Adjusted Tempo if I remember right.
He had a pretty good one at Sienna in Ronald Moore who went overseas. His two best players he had there was a wing and a big guy though.
I mean the uptempo. We run after every possession whether it's a make or miss. Most teams don't do that.
Actually a lot of teams do that which is why we're not one of the higher teams in Adjusted Tempo.
I think talent is the main reason for that. It slows down yiur tempo when you can't get a shot off.
Like I said all we really have to offer is playing time.
HawkGold
Well-Known Member
Motion offense doesn't require a point guard except for bring the ball up the floor. The high school age game and college game culture is moving away from Motion. To be good Motion requires selflessness (an Iowa strength) and 5 guys on the floor who are legit scoring threats (an Iowa weakness). The motion was not suited well for a Woodbury oriented team. A team heavy in 2s 3s and 4s is better served than 5s and a point.
Scoring is generally not an Iowa weakness, though we've seen that really exposed in the past few years against REALLY good teams that exploited that Iowa didn't have a bevvy of scorers.
The mismatch is on defense where teams are moving back in history and being very point guard oriented and prizing penetration and going to the hoop. The players suited for motion and want to play motion doesn't match well with stopping fast point guards.
The motion is easy to teach with selfless players. It doesn't take a lot of time. Never heard much about practice, but it's apparent that Iowa doesn't spend much time on D and runs an offense that is about the easiest to coach. Motion isn't going to lead to a strong block out rebounding force either as players good at that are oft going to be not in position to do that.
Motion also requires that referees call a tight game. Iowa doesn't do well against physical D.
Fran has what he wants. The question is can he do what he wants with the players he gets, speaking on the court.
Think Coach K and Bruce Webber. Motion works for K and pt guards are usually his biggest asset, but he always has a lot of players on the court that score.
Webber does well with other coach's talent. Very darn well. It falls apart when he leans on his players. He later has a problem finding enough scoring threats.
Scoring is generally not an Iowa weakness, though we've seen that really exposed in the past few years against REALLY good teams that exploited that Iowa didn't have a bevvy of scorers.
The mismatch is on defense where teams are moving back in history and being very point guard oriented and prizing penetration and going to the hoop. The players suited for motion and want to play motion doesn't match well with stopping fast point guards.
The motion is easy to teach with selfless players. It doesn't take a lot of time. Never heard much about practice, but it's apparent that Iowa doesn't spend much time on D and runs an offense that is about the easiest to coach. Motion isn't going to lead to a strong block out rebounding force either as players good at that are oft going to be not in position to do that.
Motion also requires that referees call a tight game. Iowa doesn't do well against physical D.
Fran has what he wants. The question is can he do what he wants with the players he gets, speaking on the court.
Think Coach K and Bruce Webber. Motion works for K and pt guards are usually his biggest asset, but he always has a lot of players on the court that score.
Webber does well with other coach's talent. Very darn well. It falls apart when he leans on his players. He later has a problem finding enough scoring threats.
I can tell you the dilemma comes down to one guy, his name is Tyler Ulis, Fran was 100% sure he was coming to Iowa.....he was all in on him until.....Kentucky showed up. We havent had a shot at a pt guard since. Our best option now is likely the Bettendorf kid. Whether Fran leaves or not, wont make a lot of difference. His boys who have skills, are good role players at best, so if they leave with Fran what changes?
tksirius
HN's Love Doctor
And he didn't even come in 2nd place. Ulis was a Spartan until Cal showed up.
