ADVERTISEMENT

2 & 3 Star Recruits haven't worked since Greenway

89and91

HR All-State
Jul 8, 2013
733
43
28
I have seen this posted many times on this forum.

Yep 2 and 3 star recruits haven't been successful for the Hawks since Greenway and Hodge.

Signed,
Pat Angerer
AJ Eads
Dom Alvis
Marshall Yanda
Ricky Stanzi
Micah Hyde
Christian Kirksey
Anthony Hitchens
James Morris
Brett Van Sloten
Louis Trinca-Pasat
Drew Ott
Brandon Scherff
Karl Klug
Brandon Myers
Bradley Fletcher
Charles Godfrey
Marvin McNutt
DJK
Amari Spievey
Mike Daniels
Allen Reisner
Riley Reiff

Now I am sure I am missing some folks but I think most get the picture. Or maybe just maybe this class of 2-3 star recruits will also produce All Big-Ten and NFL type players.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ichawk24
The people complaining about the recruits are crazy. According to the NFL draft, the staff is still doing a fine job of evaluating and developing talent. The legitimate gripe is, how in the he'll are you losing to the ISUs of the world when you have 5 future NFL players on each side of the ball at any given time, and they don't have 5 future NFL players on their 105 man roster? I'm not trying to exaggerate. Those numbers are probably accurate.

Seriously, we are all concerned about the OL for example, and that is a real concern. Three or four of those guys will get drafted. You can't convince me that there is little or no talent on the roster. The utilization is average at best.
 
The people complaining about the recruits are crazy. According to the NFL draft, the staff is still doing a fine job of evaluating and developing talent. The legitimate gripe is, how in the he'll are you losing to the ISUs of the world when you have 5 future NFL players on each side of the ball at any given time, and they don't have 5 future NFL players on their 105 man roster? I'm not trying to exaggerate. Those numbers are probably accurate.

Seriously, we are all concerned about the OL for example, and that is a real concern. Three or four of those guys will get drafted. You can't convince me that there is little or no talent on the roster. The utilization is average at best.
Well, since the same people who say recruiting has been stellar will also be the first to tell you that KF and Crew are exemplary gameday coaches, there really is only one plausible explanation for how a team loaded with NFL talent wins only 6 or 7 games a year at the collegiate level....

tumblr_inline_nn14dwNMHv1qb51b9_500.jpg
 
The biggest head scratcher is not the recruiting as much as it is the performance on the field. The year we had Clayborn, Angerer, etc., and I think we finished with 7 wins.

Now, when you watch that Iowa/Tennessee bowl game you will see a big difference in athletic talent between the Vols and the Hawks. We need better athletes. We need more than walk-on defensive backs from Webster City, etc. We need to recruit athletes; recruit the right athletes, and then coach them on the field.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IFlyEm and kyleparm
The problem isn't the few future NFL guys on both sides of the ball, it's the 7 or 8 other guys on the field with them that's the problem. The talent level of those guys=7-5 seasons.
 
10 years ago sure I'd say our staff identified and developed talent better than most schools. I don't think that is the case anymore. Add in the fact KF is not going to out gameday coach anyone and you are a 7-5 ish team consistently even against weak schedules.
 
The biggest head scratcher is not the recruiting as much as it is the performance on the field. The year we had Clayborn, Angerer, etc., and I think we finished with 7 wins.

Now, when you watch that Iowa/Tennessee bowl game you will see a big difference in athletic talent between the Vols and the Hawks. We need better athletes. We need more than walk-on defensive backs from Webster City, etc. We need to recruit athletes; recruit the right athletes, and then coach them on the field.

While I tend to agree with the Tennessee difference in talent I would also say I didn't see a difference in talent between Iowa and any of our 2014 opponents. Wisconsin and Nebraska have for years had higher ranked recruiting classes but those two games could have easily gone either way.

In the end the recruits this staff have consistently brought in have been enough to win games at a high level and nothing in the current class appears to be any different.
 
  • Like
Reactions: perryhawk
I'd the like to see a comparison of the offers the players above had vs the offers the players we're currently receiving commits from have.

What difference is there between a 2 or 3 star player in this class vs. a 2 or 3 star player in other classes?
 
While I tend to agree with the Tennessee difference in talent I would also say I didn't see a difference in talent between Iowa and any of our 2014 opponents. Wisconsin and Nebraska have for years had higher ranked recruiting classes but those two games could have easily gone either way.

A lot of great points being made in this thread, on both sides of the argument. But yours above is quite true.

The one point that hasn't been made yet (or did I miss it somehow?) is when you recruit the kinds of players Iowa has recruited of late, you really need to keep them in the program for all four years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JStandefer
What difference is there between a 2 or 3 star player in this class vs. a 2 or 3 star player in other classes?

Like I implied in my post you quoted, offers. We've always relied heavily on 3 star recruits for the most part, but there are so many 3 star recruits out there that there can be a big difference between one 3 star and another. So then you look at offers. We used to get quite a few 3 stars that had offers from other power conference teams. Lately we've been mostly beating out MAC level teams for our commits. I don't understand how some don't find that concerning. Go ahead and call me a Kirk hater and remind me about bob sanders and dallas clark.
 
Like I implied in my post you quoted, offers. We've always relied heavily on 3 star recruits for the most part, but there are so many 3 star recruits out there that there can be a big difference between one 3 star and another. So then you look at offers. We used to get quite a few 3 stars that had offers from other power conference teams. Lately we've been mostly beating out MAC level teams for our commits. I don't understand how some don't find that concerning. Go ahead and call me a Kirk hater and remind me about bob sanders and dallas clark.

Two and three star recruits tend to have similar offer levels from year to year. Those that have a high number of P5 offers are four star recruits. No different today than they were 10-15 years ago. My point has been all along they players we are recruiting now isn't vastly any different than when we have won 9 or more games in a season.
 
I have seen this posted many times on this forum.

Yep 2 and 3 star recruits haven't been successful for the Hawks since Greenway and Hodge.

Signed,
Pat Angerer (IA State, Indiana)
AJ Eads (Georgia Tech, Purdue)
Dom Alvis (UNI, South Dakota)
Marshall Yanda (IA State)
Ricky Stanzi (Purdue, Miami of Ohio)
Micah Hyde (MAC schools)
Christian Kirksey (Minnesota, Wisconsin)
Anthony Hitchens (Kansas, Indiana, MAC schools)
James Morris (Stanford)
Brett Van Sloten (none listed)
Louis Trinca-Pasat (Wisconsin, Stanford, Illinois, Michigan St, Indiana)
Drew Ott (Kansas St, small schools)
Brandon Scherff (Missouri, Nebraska, Kansas St, Kansas, IA State)
Karl Klug (none listed)
Brandon Myers (UNI)
Bradley Fletcher (none listed)
Charles Godfrey (Missouri, Pittsburgh)
Marvin McNutt (Wisconsin, Nebraska, Missouri, Minnesota, Kansas St, Kansas, Indiana)
DJK (Michigan, West Virginia, North Carolina, Cincinnati)
Amari Spievey (Wisconsin, Rutgers)
Mike Daniels (Temple)
Allen Reisner (none listed)
Riley Reiff (Nebraska, Minnesota)

Now I am sure I am missing some folks but I think most get the picture. Or maybe just maybe this class of 2-3 star recruits will also produce All Big-Ten and NFL type players.

The majority of the guys above had power 5 conference offers. The 3 stars we used to get had better offers than the 3 stars we are currently getting. Go back and look.
 
A lot of great points being made in this thread, on both sides of the argument. But yours above is quite true.

The one point that hasn't been made yet (or did I miss it somehow?) is when you recruit the kinds of players Iowa has recruited of late, you really need to keep them in the program for all four years.
Hit the nail on the head.
 
The majority of the guys above had power 5 conference offers. The 3 stars we used to get had better offers than the 3 stars we are currently getting. Go back and look.
Keep in mind that the kids we are getting now are committing months earlier than the kids you are referring to in earlier classes. I am confident in saying many of these recruits will be getting a lot of said offers before signing day. My guess is that these are kids that are pretty talented, and we will be stressing about some of the offers they rack up over the next several months.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ironmen1939
Keep in mind that the kids we are getting now are committing months earlier than the kids you are referring to in earlier classes. I am confident in saying many of these recruits will be getting a lot of said offers before signing day. My guess is that these are kids that are pretty talented, and we will be stressing about some of the offers they rack up over the next several months.

I hope you are right
 
The biggest head scratcher is not the recruiting as much as it is the performance on the field. The year we had Clayborn, Angerer, etc., and I think we finished with 7 wins.

Now, when you watch that Iowa/Tennessee bowl game you will see a big difference in athletic talent between the Vols and the Hawks. We need better athletes. We need more than walk-on defensive backs from Webster City, etc. We need to recruit athletes; recruit the right athletes, and then coach them on the field.

Clark, why do 'fans' think that when you lose a game (especially badly) that it was because of talent? Iowa can never just play poorly at times, it's always 'talent' when we lose. Did we lose to Nebby because of a lake of talent? NO. We had ST breakdowns that were costly. Iowa lost to TN because they executed a sound game plan, and we did not. Talent has nothing to do with QB's rotating every series, nothing to do with missed tackles, nothing to do with getting burnt on a double pass, nothing to do with a KR throwing the ball in bounds etc... The Iowa coaches will tell they didn't have more talent. They just peed down there leg. Period. It happens. You sheep fans listen to these announcers spewing their SEC bs about the speed of SEC teams, blah, blah, and buy into it , just like you watch FOX and think you are getting news.
P.S. Tn went 6-6 regular season with that UNBELIEVABLE TALENT. Now theres some coaches that should be fired, don't ya think!!!
 
Clark, why do 'fans' think that when you lose a game (especially badly) that it was because of talent? Iowa can never just play poorly at times, it's always 'talent' when we lose. Did we lose to Nebby because of a lake of talent? NO. We had ST breakdowns that were costly. Iowa lost to TN because they executed a sound game plan, and we did not. Talent has nothing to do with QB's rotating every series, nothing to do with missed tackles, nothing to do with getting burnt on a double pass, nothing to do with a KR throwing the ball in bounds etc... The Iowa coaches will tell they didn't have more talent. They just peed down there leg. Period. It happens. You sheep fans listen to these announcers spewing their SEC bs about the speed of SEC teams, blah, blah, and buy into it , just like you watch FOX and think you are getting news.
P.S. Tn went 6-6 regular season with that UNBELIEVABLE TALENT. Now theres some coaches that should be fired, don't ya think!!!
Look who they played compared to Iowa's schedule last year. Get a clue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hawks_Rock_12
Missed tackles actually have a lot to do with talent (speed and strength of the opposition). It's a little easier tackling a toddler from Indiana than a sprinter from TN.
 
Clark, why do 'fans' think that when you lose a game (especially badly) that it was because of talent? Iowa can never just play poorly at times, it's always 'talent' when we lose. Did we lose to Nebby because of a lake of talent? NO. We had ST breakdowns that were costly. Iowa lost to TN because they executed a sound game plan, and we did not. Talent has nothing to do with QB's rotating every series, nothing to do with missed tackles, nothing to do with getting burnt on a double pass, nothing to do with a KR throwing the ball in bounds etc... The Iowa coaches will tell they didn't have more talent. They just peed down there leg. Period. It happens. You sheep fans listen to these announcers spewing their SEC bs about the speed of SEC teams, blah, blah, and buy into it , just like you watch FOX and think you are getting news.
P.S. Tn went 6-6 regular season with that UNBELIEVABLE TALENT. Now theres some coaches that should be fired, don't ya think!!!

Okay wait ... So getting our a** handed to us by Minnesota and Tennessee was just a case of poor execution and missed tackles? Iowa lost to Tennessee because Tennessee out coached us and had much, much better talent on the field. Tennessee went 6-6 with a MUCH tougher schedule than the one faced by Iowa. And Tennessee did it with mostly second-year players. Nice attempt on the sugar coating. Will give you an "A" for effort but a "D" for results ...
 
No matter how you slice it - lack of talent, poor execution, poor schemes, poor game-day coaching, player attrition, etc. - there is but one common denominator - Kirk Ferentz. So while some of you applaud this new recruiting strategy, keep in mind that this same staff with their same schemes will be roaming the sidelines if/when they actually see the field (which is probably in '17).
 
No matter how you slice it - lack of talent, poor execution, poor schemes, poor game-day coaching, player attrition, etc. - there is but one common denominator - Kirk Ferentz. So while some of you applaud this new recruiting strategy, keep in mind that this same staff with their same schemes will be roaming the sidelines if/when they actually see the field (which is probably in '17).

Again, it is about keeping players in the system all four years. I don't love our offense (at all), I don't love keeping talented youngsters on the bench, and I don't love the "play not to lose" garbage on both sides of the ball... nor do I enjoy the blank stare on the sidelines and the "That's Football" quotes after games we totally fricken blew... BUT, I think KF has shown an ability to put some damn good teams on the field when he keeps guys in the system all four years. Of course, some of the things we've both mentioned very well could be leading to the attrition, which is somewhat on KF and the choices the staff makes, and sometimes on kids in their teens and early 20s making silly choices.

I'm no Einstein, but just saying...
 
Okay wait ... So getting our a** handed to us by Minnesota and Tennessee was just a case of poor execution and missed tackles? Iowa lost to Tennessee because Tennessee out coached us and had much, much better talent on the field. Tennessee went 6-6 with a MUCH tougher schedule than the one faced by Iowa. And Tennessee did it with mostly second-year players. Nice attempt on the sugar coating. Will give you an "A" for effort but a "D" for results ...

Spot on and I'll add we looked like we wanted no part of being in that bowl game and Tenn. was excited to be there.
Excitement and superior talent was why they lambasted us.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WolfeHawk
Again, it is about keeping players in the system all four years. I don't love our offense (at all), I don't love keeping talented youngsters on the bench, and I don't love the "play not to lose" garbage on both sides of the ball... nor do I enjoy the blank stare on the sidelines and the "That's Football" quotes after games we totally fricken blew... BUT, I think KF has shown an ability to put some damn good teams on the field when he keeps guys in the system all four years. Of course, some of the things we've both mentioned very well could be leading to the attrition, which is somewhat on KF and the choices the staff makes, and sometimes on kids in their teens and early 20s making silly choices.

I'm no Einstein, but just saying...
That's very good. It's almost like KF has a restrictor plate on the offense
 
Iowa's class will produce some NFL level players. And there's more than 1-2 solid players in it. The "problem" if you want to call it that, of Iowa's current recruiting strategy, isn't development or even evaluation.

It's a numbers and probability game. The eventual issue will be depth. And if retention rates are high or only slightly high, the effects will be that much more devastating.
 
Clark, why do 'fans' think that when you lose a game (especially badly) that it was because of talent? Iowa can never just play poorly at times, it's always 'talent' when we lose. Did we lose to Nebby because of a lake of talent? NO. We had ST breakdowns that were costly. Iowa lost to TN because they executed a sound game plan, and we did not. Talent has nothing to do with QB's rotating every series, nothing to do with missed tackles, nothing to do with getting burnt on a double pass, nothing to do with a KR throwing the ball in bounds etc... The Iowa coaches will tell they didn't have more talent. They just peed down there leg. Period. It happens. You sheep fans listen to these announcers spewing their SEC bs about the speed of SEC teams, blah, blah, and buy into it , just like you watch FOX and think you are getting news.
P.S. Tn went 6-6 regular season with that UNBELIEVABLE TALENT. Now theres some coaches that should be fired, don't ya think!!!

Well Iowa did get out coached at least defensively. I think the announcer Rod Gilmore said it perfectly in the 2nd half when Iowa was doing the same thing on D that to make no changes was the worst decision to do and was critical of Parker and rightfully so. Didn't have to be huge changes but least try something differently he implied.

For Iowa to be successful as a developmental program of players it hurts them more than Ohio States of the world with injuries or attrition of players leaving because it forces a situation like last season playing LBs who are a year or 2 from being ready for big 10 play. Where as the difference is these top 150 players bama and osu bring in are more likely to play as freshman and sophs.
 
Again, it is about keeping players in the system all four years. I don't love our offense (at all), I don't love keeping talented youngsters on the bench, and I don't love the "play not to lose" garbage on both sides of the ball... nor do I enjoy the blank stare on the sidelines and the "That's Football" quotes after games we totally fricken blew... BUT, I think KF has shown an ability to put some damn good teams on the field when he keeps guys in the system all four years. Of course, some of the things we've both mentioned very well could be leading to the attrition, which is somewhat on KF and the choices the staff makes, and sometimes on kids in their teens and early 20s making silly choices.

I'm no Einstein, but just saying...

So true. Other than coaching, keeping kids in the program and always having a bunch of upperclassmen and 5th seniors on the roster every year is arguably the most important factor in building sustained success, IMO. Redshirting is the great equalizer in college football.

That's how Wisconsin, Lloyd Carr, MSU, Jim Tressel, and 2000-2010 Iowa were able to role quality teams out year after year without much volatility. It becomes a machine. The question is, what caused KF's machine to break? How do you go from a deep, balanced and healthy roster to featuring fullbacks at RB and going with a heavy dose of walk-ons in the two deeps? Now, a vibrant walk-on program is crucial and I'm a big proponent, but it should be supplemental.

IMO, KF would be better served replenishing his ranks with JUCOs. Nebraska and Kansas State have made a living doing this. It's not ideal but it's certainly a great bandaid until he can build up the roster again.
 
ADVERTISEMENT