Curious to know the board's opinion on this. Do you think he will get a shot at breaking the starting lineup this year? Assuming BS stays at 149, is 141 a possibility for Kemerer?
Can Kemerer start as a freshman?
- Thread starter Hawkfromday1
- Start date
Can he? Yes.
Should he? No.
Will he? Very doubtful.
I agree with TnT's general philosophy that every incoming recruit should redshirt, too much too gain. It is a big jump from High School to College even for elite kids.
Should he? No.
Will he? Very doubtful.
I agree with TnT's general philosophy that every incoming recruit should redshirt, too much too gain. It is a big jump from High School to College even for elite kids.
He's very capable of doing so, but I think it'd be best get him in the room for a year and prepare him to be a 4x All American.
Funny how this always comes up. Like always, no. I think the only way something like that happens is if we get a top guy like Hall or Lee. And even then probably only if we're on the cusp of being a championship team and we think a guy can become a high AA and put us over the top. I don't think that happens next year.
I think he could win Midlands and it wouldn't make any difference. The precedent has been set, there are no true freshman starting at Iowa under Brands (and no Burak doesn't count - he redshirted in Colorado Springs). Until we actually see it happen, there is no reason whatsoever to believe it will.
If you aren't going to let someone like Brent Metcalf wrestle as a True Freshman, I think the rest of the "mortals" have little shot of that happening.
You are wrong about this. Sorensen was the right answer away from wrestling his true freshman year. Brandon decided he wasn't ready, so they kept the RS on. Brands is not opposed to putting a true fresh in the lineup under the right circumstance. I don't see it happening next year, but it will eventually happen.
I agree with this. Our coaches will wrestle true freshman if they are essential in getting our team a title. DSJ didn't wrestle as a true freshman because he wasn't needed to win the title, Cory Clark and Thomas Gilman redshirted because we had McDonough and Ramos, Brent Metcalf redshirted because that VT team wasn't going anywhere even if he did wrestle...etc. You better believe that if we had a 157 or 165 pound true freshman that had a good chance of being an AA he would have been on the mat last year. It has to be right for the wrestler and the team, but I'm willing to bet it will happen in the not too distant future. FWIW, I do think Kemerer will redshirt
From what I remember reading, Brands said Sorenson's answer to "do you want to burn your shirt" didn't exude enough confidence for him to justify pulling it. But I could be wrong...
I have always felt a freshman redshirt was the best option. I have changed my thinking on that somewhat based on NCAA's stricter interpretation of medical redshirts. The NCAA is now much less inclined to grant a medical redshirt if a redshirt was already taken. See ISU's Gallick who got hurt at the beginning of his senior year and was denied a medical redshirt because he had redshirted his freshman year.
Should you plan for injuries? No. Is it nice to have a redshirt in your backpocket for unforeseen circumstances? Yes.
Also need to consider the skill level of the wrestler and team title hopes.
I still recommend redshirting during the freshman year, but it is not a no brainer.
Should you plan for injuries? No. Is it nice to have a redshirt in your backpocket for unforeseen circumstances? Yes.
Also need to consider the skill level of the wrestler and team title hopes.
I still recommend redshirting during the freshman year, but it is not a no brainer.
This misses the mark. Just because it has never happened doesn't mean it won't. Brands has stated in the past that he's open to it depending on the kid and the situation.
If I was wrong about it, Sorensen would have been the 1st True Freshman to wrestle at Iowa under Brands. He didn't, and I highly doubt he had much say in the matter, regardless of what was printed.
Bottom line is it has never happened, and until it does, there is no reason to speculate that it will. Brands has been a Head Coach now for about 10 years. That's a whole lot of potential true freshman that never got the nod to start. Appears to be a trend to me.
Last edited:
Really? If you can't find a "situation" at Iowa in the last 5 years that didn't warrant starting ANYONE to replace an ineffective returning starter at multiple weights, I don't know what to tell you. How much worse could it have been? If the "situation" hasn't warranted it up until now, I'd love to see what the hell would have to happen to make it so.
But you might be right, maybe this is the year that Brands wrestles a True Freshman, and Kirk Ferentz allows his QB to throw a 6 yard pass on 3rd and 5.
Until then, I guess maybe I'll go with common sense and logic, and believe it when I see it.
No. I'm telling you that the man himself has said he would do it in the right situation. You're telling us there's no way he would start a Mark Hall under any circumstance?
Whether you want to believe it or not is up to you. You act like there have been dozens of scenarios where this is considered which is simply untrue. We have only had 2 situations since Brands has been at Iowa. The coaches didn't feel DSJ was ready and we didn't need his points. Brandon and his family didn't feel Brandon was ready. It will happen when the coaches, family, and wrestler feel they are ready. It isn't a situation that comes up often.
Here is just one quote on the subject:
“I think you have to put a team out there that can win the nationals, and then when you do that, you have to make the best decision at some weights where what’s our best choice?” Brands said. “It’s definitely an option, but as we say every year and even when we recruit, we’re not going to pull a guy without talking to parents, without talking to the kid, without everybody feeling good.”
Sorensen said he’s on board with his coaches’ decision, but when asked if he was ready to be the starter, he said: “Probably not.”’
“I’ve still got a lot of things to work on,” he said. “Then again, yeah, I can go out there and battle. I can do that.”
Believe it or not I really don't care, but Brands isn't against putting a freshman out there if it makes sense. We didn't need DSJ and it didn't make sense with Brandon since he said he wasn't ready. It will happen at some point and it won't be near the miracle of Feretnz beating Iowa State or allowing 6 yard passes.
Last edited:
Agree with this. Brands will start a true freshman if it's the right idea. I also think everyone agrees Brands has a strong hesitancy to start a true freshman and understands why. Hell, he even did with Burak if I recall correctly. However, has he really had a situation where the true freshman has been head and shoulders above the current starter? St John? Not really. That was the year we had the Janssen, Kerr, Ballweg situation. Ballweg even beat St John earlier in the year, and he wasn't even the eventual starter. Sorensen? Possibly, and it evidently was considered. True freshman Sorensen wasn't head and shoulders above Grothus though. They placed 3rd and 4th at Midlands and Grothus was having a fairly decent season up to that point and Sorensen had just dropped to 149.
I don't think anyone can paint this with a broad brush and say Brands will not start a true freshman without looking at the full picture. It's not like he's had a true freshman Snyder, Cox, Megaludis, Hunter Steibs, etc at these weights.
Respectfully disagree.
St. John lost 3-2 to Ballweg. Losing a one point low scoring match could mean a lot of things. When it's one of your room partners, probably wasn't that big of a deal. St. John took 5th at Midlands the next closest was Janssen, who made the round of 12. Oh and St. John beat a then the #9 ranked Salazar .. by major decision. St. John had All-American potential, granted that team was loaded, but if we thought we needed an extra point or 2 I think St. John would have been the choice.
I am a big St. John fan, and I am glad he did redshirt, but I thought it was pretty clear he was Iowa's best chance at being an All-American at that weight, and I think he would have been in the mix for a podium spot.
You're not disagreeing. You would say St. John is "head and shoulders" above Kerr who went 2-2 at NCAA's that year? Of course St John's an upgrade, but an extra point or 2 at NCAA's isn't much of an upgrade. If I'm a coach, I'm not pulling a shirt unless I have an educated guess he's going to score significant team points at NCAA's. I don't think St. John's results show he would have scored significantly more points or enough to justify pulling the shirt.
Sure, but you have to remember, we weren't expecting Kerr to win two matches. From what I remember the hope was he would get us one win, we would be estatic to get two. End result, we were thrilled with the way Kerr came through.
St. John on the other hand probably had a floor that would have been Kerr's ceiling. If you can major decision a top 10 guy at Midlands, you are going to score some points at nationals. I don't think Kerr was a threat to bonus anyone at NCAAs. Maybe my expectations on St. John were higher than most, but I thought he was a way better option, he just wasn't an absolute need.
Really? You don't think Brent Metcalf belongs in the conversation with the likes of the guys you mentioned? I'd say he does and then some. I'm certain that every team that has ever wrestled True Freshman have not won Team National Titles (for those that say VT wasn't going anywhere anyway when Metcalf was there).
All I've seen so far is "excuses" while he hasn't done so, and the fact is no one knows for certain if those "decisions" were right or wrong. Brands and any Head Coach can give any reason they want, that is their prerogative as a Head Coach. At the end of the day, they're "excuses", applied with some reasoning and rational behind them I would hope, but "excuses" nonetheless. Whether they are logical or not is up to the beholder. What we know now, is the reasons given for NOT starting a True Freshman, and we all NOW know how it worked out. What we don't know is how it would have worked out had any of these individuals actually started as True Freshman. MAYBE they take some lumps early and IMPROVE as the season wears on while constantly wrestling. MAYBE they don't improve at all, like quite a few of our wrestlers have done lately.
People are acting like the ONLY reason you would pull a redshirt is if the guy is capable of winning a National Title. What about letting guys go to replace starters that haven't done anything in the way of scoring points for Iowa at NCAA's? It's not like we're piling up the NCAA Titles, so perhaps take a chance every once in awhile.
I want to make this VERY clear. I am NOT a proponent of pulling redshirts willy-nilly. Nor am I "bashing" Brands for his failure to do so after 9-10 years as a Head Coach. But I am a proponent of putting the best team possible out there in order to enhance the chances of the University of Iowa's Wrestling Team to win Team National Titles, and if that means wrestling True Freshman regardless of NCAA finish, then so be it. IF you consider yourself part of the College Wrestling "Elite", then you should be able to do this and successfully re-recruit in 4 years shouldn't you? There is no law against wrestling kids for 4 years, and having them graduate in 4 years. I'm not saying it's easy, I'm saying it can be done.
We have all kinds of folks come on here and tell us how "great" this generation of wrestler is, how they're so much more "college ready" than the guys of the past. If that is actually True, what's the problem with the upper tier of them wrestling without a redshirt?
Just in the case of Brandon Sorensen, whose to say IF he wrestles 2 years ago full-time, that he doesn't come out on a tear this last year and win the whole damn thing? Well, nobody knows do they? How many points did we score at NCAA's where Sorensen could have wrestled? Just one instance, food for thought. The Team Dynamic changes every single year, new recruits come in, rinse and repeat.
I'm basically playing Devil's Advocate here. This much I do know. We haven't won an NCAA Team Title or even remotely contended for one in years. That means something has to change. One place to look would be to start wrestling True Freshman that are capable of handling the environment, and from what I'm told by the public at-large, the number of those kids has went up exponentially in the past 10 years or so. So either those statements are B.S., or Iowa hasn't recruited anyone remotely good enough to start as a True Freshman. Which is it? If it's the latter, that's really bad. Either way, something has to change/improve or we're going to keep looking up at the "big boys" at the end of National Tournaments.
What we need are point scorers at NCAA's, no matter which class they are in. The more the merrier.
So if Mark Hall says I want to come to Iowa, but I want to be promised I have the opportunity to compete for a starting spot as a freshman ,and if I win it, I will get to wrestle. Think there's any way Brands says sorry, we don't wrestle freshmen at Iowa,? Not a chance.
You're also seeing quotes from the man himself yet you continually ignore them.
He was building his program at VT and trying to build them into a championship team so he chose to redshirt the studs in that class. That's why Metcalf didn't wrestle. If we had a Metcalf-like talent coming in for 141 they would be seriously considered for the lineup.
I think we're splitting hairs here. Bringing up Metcalf isn't really relevant. Brands redshirted the entire class. What good what it have done if he redshirted the rest but pulled Brent's? This isn't a black or white issue and just because history shows Brands has redshirted doesn't mean it can't be speculated. As discussed above, St John's is really the only situation while Brands has been at Iowa where pulling a shirt would have been an upgrade. And, it probably wouldn't have amounted to a significant team point differential. I think Brands did put significant thought into pulling St. Johns shirt.
Put it this way. If true freshman Brent Metcalf arrived on campus during Kelly's year at 149, I would be damn shocked if Brands doesn't pull Metcalf's shirt. Brands hasn't had a situation at Iowa yet where the true freshman was overwhelmingly better than the current starter. I don't disagree with any decision Brands has made regarding pulling shirts, but in this hypothetical Metcalf/Kelly situation, I would disagree wholeheartedly.
Put it this way. If true freshman Brent Metcalf arrived on campus during Kelly's year at 149, I would be damn shocked if Brands doesn't pull Metcalf's shirt. Brands hasn't had a situation at Iowa yet where the true freshman was overwhelmingly better than the current starter. I don't disagree with any decision Brands has made regarding pulling shirts, but in this hypothetical Metcalf/Kelly situation, I would disagree wholeheartedly.
Kerr got 4th at Big Ten's and went 2-2 at NCAA's. I 100% agree St John was the better option though. I don't think it was significant enough to justify pulling the shirt. Iowa ended up winning Big Ten's by 37 points and NCAA's by 44 that year. Brands probably realized St Johns potential additional 5-6 points wasn't a good payoff, and agreed with what you're saying. He wasn't an absolute need.
And you continually ignore the FACT that its never happened, despite having plenty of opportunities to do so. And then come back with the "just because it's never happened doesn't mean it won't". No kidding? If we live long enough, it's bound to right?
I fully understand why he redshirted Metcalf and his entire team at Virginia Tech, which is like saying I understand how water turns to ice. The #1 reason being they were Virginia Tech - pre-Tom Brands. In short they were invisible. To say they were just awful would have been a compliment. Bottom line is Brands CHOSE to redshirt Metcalf and many other studs he recruited in his 1st year there. He certainly didn't HAVE TO, he CHOSE TO, quite a different distinction don't ya think? The fact of the matter is, pretty much every single guy he brought in that year, would have beaten the incumbent out for a starting spot at Virginia Tech. Either that or my memory of all those Virginia Tech All-Americans they were throwing out left and right in those days is cloudy...................... He had a "plan", that is what he went with.
Now he's at Iowa, the preeminent wrestling power of the last 40 years. If ever there was a place where you should be able to go out on a limb and wrestle a True Freshman at a dead weight (which we've CLEARLY had plenty of), I would think Iowa would be it. And yet, 10 years into his existence as a Head Coach, there has never been a situation that warranted pulling a redshirt? Damn odd I'd say, but apparently that's just me.
Believe it or not I'm not trying to be argumentative. What I'm getting at is what is the right situation, and just what exactly has to happen in order for that to happen? Appears to be one hell of a lot to me. It's not like we're piling up Team Titles in the meantime, and one could certainly argue it's cost us a recruit or two with the "perception" that Brands won't start True Freshman regardless of the circumstances (actions speak one hell of a lot louder than words - does it not?). Until proven otherwise, the fact remains it hasn't happened at any point in time, prior to this day in 2015 with a Tom Brands coached team. Period.
We can cherry pick certain years and certain weights and debate all day long on whether or not someone may have been a better choice as a True Freshman. The fact is we don't know how it plays out, because its never happened. The SAD part of that equation is, we've had plenty of opportunities to replace dead weights with ANYBODY, and haven't had what apparently is a "good" enough True Freshman to insert at those dead weights (insert reasons A,B & C here). As long as that continues, we'll be out of the National Title hunt by Friday night, which has been the norm in recent past. I for one would like to see that change, however it comes about. Recruiting appears to be on the uptick, and with that the potential of starting a True Freshman should be more of a consideration, than an afterthought.
This much I know for certain, for Mark Hall or anyone else entering Iowa under Brands, the NEXT True Freshman that wrestles, will also be the FIRST one.
Maybe we should have a contest on who THAT GUY is going to be, and which year it will occur?
Brands first year at VA Tech is not even remotely relevant to this discussion. Not sure why it's even brought up. I like you sloe, but I think you're making this far too black and white without truly analyzing his options. Please list the dead weights in Brands years at Iowa, the true freshman at those dead weights and the expected team point differential if those true freshman wrestled. Honestly, the best example there is is Burak even though you say he technically does not qualify. Brands pulled the shirt when he had it to keep on him. Brands has been fortunate in his coaching career (at Iowa) to have the luxury of redshirting as the true freshman at these dead weights would not be a massive upgrade. The best argument being St. John in a year Iowa easily won Big Ten's and NCAA's. It would have been a waste to pull it. If, and this is a big if, Kemerer is able to reach 141 and he's putting 4+ points pounding on Carton AND he's clearly distanced himself against the field looking like a solid bet for AA, I would be surprised if Brands still redshirts him.
Somehow the fact that there have only been 2 guys who were possible candidates has been lost on Mr. Sloehawk. We have not had any other true freshman that were going to score significantly more points. Mainly because we have some pretty good teams during Brands tenure.
Instead of focusing on the 10 year aspect why don't you look at the holes in the lineup over those 10 years. There have been on average a couple of holes each year. Now look at the true freshman available at those weights. You will see that there have only been two instances where a legitimate case could be made. I think the correct decision was made in both instances.
Instead of focusing on the 10 year aspect why don't you look at the holes in the lineup over those 10 years. There have been on average a couple of holes each year. Now look at the true freshman available at those weights. You will see that there have only been two instances where a legitimate case could be made. I think the correct decision was made in both instances.
Only 2 guys were "possible" candidates? LOL! Hell, we've had plenty of opportunity to replace 0 NCAA points with 0 NCAA points and younger/hungrier wrestlers and let the chips fall where they may. We aren't exactly in reload mode at the moment.
