New Rivals hoops rankings for 2017

[TomKakert]

The new and expanded Rivals hoops rankings for 2017 class are out. Connor McCaffery comes in at #91 in the country.

https://rivals.yahoo.com/basketballrecruiting/basketball/recruiting/rankings/rank-3574/2017

 

[DanHawkPella]

Shouldn't have posted that, might make Pkongsh nervous about his $100 that Connor would be ranked better than 75, but still a lot of time to go

I'm a big fan of Connor though, if his shooting comes around to a high level, he very well could move back up the rankings, but PG is a tough spot to break the top 15 at your position when a lot of guys are just coming into their own. My sense is that Connor is closer to his ceiling than some other PG's who will emerge the next 12-18 months, but he definitely has some unique tools in a big frame, so I think he can be a Jeff Horner type player for us, with perhaps better PG skills but with shooting TBD.

http://iowa.forums.rivals.com/threads/joe-wieskamp-is-16-and-5-star.18543/

 

[StormHawk42]

I see we have 7 offers currently out for 2017, all of whom are in the Top 100. But do we even have any room for anyone since Connor is committed and the only departing senior will be Jok? I expect that at least one of the 6 freshmen will move on if playing time isn't there. But in the chance it doesn't, is our 2017 recruiting already over?

 

[michael65]

I see we have 7 offers currently out for 2017, all of whom are in the Top 100. But do we even have any room for anyone since Connor is committed and the only departing senior will be Jok? I expect that at least one of the 6 freshmen will move on if playing time isn't there. But in the chance it doesn't, is our 2017 recruiting already over?

2, I believe. Jok and Jones.

 

[StormHawk42]

Knew I was forgetting someone

 

[CanadaHawk]

Knew I was forgetting someone

As of now, there will be 2 schollys in 2017 and 4 in 2016. But Fran is recruiting like there'll be more. And history shows there probably will be.

 

[TomKakert]

As of now, there will be 2 schollys in 2017 and 4 in 2016. But Fran is recruiting like there'll be more. And history shows there probably will be.

You always have to recruit like there will be more...always.

 

[RefinedBean]

Is there a chance that Connor walks on? McBuckets did that at Creighton, and I don't think it's too uncommon for coaches' kids to do that.

 

[fish1hawk]

Is there a chance that Connor walks on? McBuckets did that at Creighton, and I don't think it's too uncommon for coaches' kids to do that.

I am pretty sure they still count toward the schollies unless they never travel with the team for away games or join team meals

 

[icu81222]

I am pretty sure they still count toward the schollies unless they never travel with the team for away games or join team meals

How would that be? A walk on is a walk on, right? Is there a rule against walk ons traveling or playing?

 

[SSG T]

I am pretty sure they still count toward the schollies unless they never travel with the team for away games or join team meals

No. They only count towards scholarships if they are actually accept an athletic scholarship. Plus, walk on are allowed to travel, and they changed the rules about the access they get to everything else. So if Connor did "walk on" he would get the same access all of the scholarship players did, he'd just have to pay to do so.

Note - I'm not saying he should or shouldn't or would or wouldn't.

 

[jdv77]

If I recall correctly, McDermott was a scholarship player until his final year, when he gave up his scholarship so that Creighton could keep Grant Gibbs on scholarship when Grant was awarded a 6th year of eligibility.

In my opinion, it is unnecessary to ask Connor and Fran to give Connor's scholarship to another player. Theoretically, it allows you to stockpile more talent, but I don't think that is how basketball works. You don't need 14 scholarship-caliber players in any year. You aren't going to play more than 10 regularly. So if you had a full complement of 13 plus Connor, 3-4 aren't going to be playing. All you would be doing is adding another body to the bench that would be likely to transfer for lack of playing time.

 

[DanL53]

If I recall correctly, McDermott was a scholarship player until his final year, when he gave up his scholarship so that Creighton could keep Grant Gibbs on scholarship when Grant was awarded a 6th year of eligibility.

In my opinion, it is unnecessary to ask Connor and Fran to give Connor's scholarship to another player. Theoretically, it allows you to stockpile more talent, but I don't think that is how basketball works. You don't need 14 scholarship-caliber players in any year. You aren't going to play more than 10 regularly. So if you had a full complement of 13 plus Connor, 3-4 aren't going to be playing. All you would be doing is adding another body to the bench that would be likely to transfer for lack of playing time.

I agree. We shouldn't need it, or want Conner to go without just to have a scholarship to pursue recruits. But, if we had a full roster and a major talent wanted to be a Hawkeye it would not surprise me if Conner became a walkon. It is entirely up to the McCaffery family. But if I were Coach Fran, and a major player was at my door, I'd pay my kids way through school.

 

[DanHawkPella]

Any chance of a lineup with Connor at PG; Huerter at SG, and Patrick at SF?

If Patrick keeps growing, he'll be a stretch 4!

 

[CanadaHawk]

Any chance of a lineup with Connor at PG; Huerter at SG, and Patrick at SF?

If Patrick keeps growing, he'll be a stretch 4!

I've read that Patrick wants to be a player like Jarrod Uthoff.

 

[BGHAWK]

Why on earth would we want a roster of 14, 13 plus Connor as a walk on, when you cannot play more than 8 or 9 guys anyway? If he is good enough for a scholarship, then give him one.

 

[FranklinHawk]

Why on earth would we want a roster of 14, 13 plus Connor as a walk on, when you cannot play more than 8 or 9 guys anyway? If he is good enough for a scholarship, then give him one.

In my mind it's only the scenario Dan described where we're fully on scholly's and a major impact guy comes into play. Otherwise Connor should be on scholarship.

 

[hwksforlife]

I've read that Patrick wants to be a player like Jarrod Uthoff.

That was the comparison I had. He is Ute with better handles and hopefully as good or better shooter.

 

[LarryMullenJr.]

That was the comparison I had. He is Ute with better handles and hopefully as good or better shooter.

Not trying to be a turd, but isn't the kid like 14? Shouldn't we give him a chance to shave before putting him an experienced upper-classman's shoes?

 

[hwksforlife]

Not trying to be a turd, but isn't the kid like 14? Shouldn't we give him a chance to shave before putting him an experienced upper-classman's shoes?

You need to try harder.

 

[RocknRollface]

If I recall correctly, McDermott was a scholarship player until his final year, when he gave up his scholarship so that Creighton could keep Grant Gibbs on scholarship when Grant was awarded a 6th year of eligibility.

In my opinion, it is unnecessary to ask Connor and Fran to give Connor's scholarship to another player. Theoretically, it allows you to stockpile more talent, but I don't think that is how basketball works. You don't need 14 scholarship-caliber players in any year. You aren't going to play more than 10 regularly. So if you had a full complement of 13 plus Connor, 3-4 aren't going to be playing. All you would be doing is adding another body to the bench that would be likely to transfer for lack of playing time.

Actually that's essentially the model the sec uses with their oversigning and also how college football used to be dominated by certain schools hoarding the talent, only on a much larger scale.

If it's actually true that the only difference between walking on and having a scholy is the actual paying of tuition and not all the other benefits then Fran would be crazy not to take advantage of this loophole.

Obviously you don't play 14 players, but having essentially a 14th scholy could be a huge benefit in countless ways.

It allows you to cover up a miss, it allows you to fill in for an injury, it allows you to recruit over a player that turns out to be average, you can steal a guy from a competitor, basically it allows you that much more flexibility than everyone else.

 

[RocknRollface]

Why on earth would we want a roster of 14, 13 plus Connor as a walk on, when you cannot play more than 8 or 9 guys anyway? If he is good enough for a scholarship, then give him one.

Why have more than 9 then?

C'mon man it's pretty simple, allot of players don't turn out that great, the opportunity to recruit over them is just one obvious benefit. There's basically endless examples of how another scholy would be beneficial.

There's a reason the NCAA limits the amount you can give out. It's not because coaches wouldn't fill them, it's because they would.

 

[freemanbrenner]

If iowa you get Michael Porter Jr. Wow! That would be some unreal length with what we already have. Not going to be easy but there is a connection and he has said good things about Iowa in an article on this site. He might rival Kevin Durant for most points averages in a Season for freshman

 

[RocknRollface]

In my mind it's only the scenario Dan described where we're fully on scholly's and a major impact guy comes into play. Otherwise Connor should be on scholarship.

What if Adam Woodbury were to break his leg this summer?

Wouldn't it be nice to have an extra one then?

What if we would have had an extra one when Gabe Olesiani was a freshman when Brommer was injured?

Instead of wasting a guy like Gabe with exponential potential you bring in a 5th yr transfer or juco to take those garbage minutes and this year we'd be one of the favorites to win the league.

It's really just common sense , more scholarships = an advantage.

 

[FranklinHawk]

What if Adam Woodbury were to break his leg this summer?

Wouldn't it be nice to have an extra one then?

What if we would have had an extra one when Gabe Olesiani was a freshman when Brommer was injured?

Instead of wasting a guy like Gabe with exponential potential you bring in a 5th yr transfer or juco to take those garbage minutes and this year we'd be one of the favorites to win the league.

It's really just common sense , more scholarships = an advantage.

You can't keep that many guys happy sitting on the bench for those what-if scenarios, and this isn't the NBA where when one of those things does happen you just go out and pick up a guy. 13 scholarship players is just plenty in my mind.

 

[DanL53]

What if Adam Woodbury were to break his leg this summer?

Wouldn't it be nice to have an extra one then?

What if we would have had an extra one when Gabe Olesiani was a freshman when Brommer was injured?

Instead of wasting a guy like Gabe with exponential potential you bring in a 5th yr transfer or juco to take those garbage minutes and this year we'd be one of the favorites to win the league.

It's really just common sense , more scholarships = an advantage.

1) I believe we had an extra one the year Olaseni was a freshman. I could use help verifying but due to the rebuild after Lickliter was fired, and the three transfers we've had:

2010/11: Eleven players on scholarship (Not counting walkons awarded a scholarship for any years)
2011/12: Eleven players on scholarship (Would have been twelve but I believe this is the year Hubbard came and went?)
2012/13: Eleven players on scholarship, Uthoff paying his own way and sitting out a year.
2013/14: Twelve players on scholarship, Ingram had transferred, didn't fill his spot.
2014/15: Eleven players on scholarship, Meyer had transferred, didn't fill his spot.
2015/16: Thirteen players on scholarship

In regards to breaking Woody's leg, the decision was made by Coach McCaffery to sign talent over a lesser post player.

I'm not seeing a situation where having one of our guys be a walkon in the last six years would have been an advantage. In fact it seems to me keeping thirteen guys on the team is hard enough.

I believe your common sense is more a theorem. In pratical application there is no reason to me to believe we need to have Conner walkon to allow us to pursue a fourteenth player. I have already said that should we have a full roster with Conner and a situation presents itself where a significant advantage could be had by making him a walkon, it could still happen. But even then, coaches decision.

 

[bouma1415]

Ideally, you get 3 recruits every year, and 4 one year. So I could see using the schollie to get 3 for 2017. Now if you have a defection from 15 or 16, then you have an adjustment to make. But as a coach, you would probably prefer to spread out your schollies evenly...especially since Iowa doesn't get the one and dones too often.

 

[RocknRollface]

You can't keep that many guys happy sitting on the bench for those what-if scenarios, and this isn't the NBA where when one of those things does happen you just go out and pick up a guy. 13 scholarship players is just plenty in my mind.

You don't need to keep the guys that aren't in the top ten of the rotation happy, that's the point.

If they are going into their third year and not in the top ten then it's actually much better if they leave.

Recruiting is an inexact science, not everyone works out.

Case in point Fran tried to recruit over Clemmons. Clemmons got more motivated and stepped up. Dickerson turned out to be a dud and left, then Fran was able to sign Christian Williams with that free up scholy.

To me there's no common sense argument that less assets and flexibility is a better thing.

 

[RocknRollface]

1) I believe we had an extra one the year Olaseni was a freshman. I could use help verifying but due to the rebuild after Lickliter was fired, and the three transfers we've had:

2010/11: Eleven players on scholarship (Not counting walkons awarded a scholarship for any years)
2011/12: Eleven players on scholarship (Would have been twelve but I believe this is the year Hubbard came and went?)
2012/13: Eleven players on scholarship, Uthoff paying his own way and sitting out a year.
2013/14: Twelve players on scholarship, Ingram had transferred, didn't fill his spot.
2014/15: Eleven players on scholarship, Meyer had transferred, didn't fill his spot.
2015/16: Thirteen players on scholarship

In regards to breaking Woody's leg, the decision was made by Coach McCaffery to sign talent over a lesser post player.

I'm not seeing a situation where having one of our guys be a walkon in the last six years would have been an advantage. In fact it seems to me keeping thirteen guys on the team is hard enough.

I believe your common sense is more a theorem. In pratical application there is no reason to me to believe we need to have Conner walkon to allow us to pursue a fourteenth player. I have already said that should we have a full roster with Conner and a situation presents itself where a significant advantage could be had by making him a walkon, it could still happen. But even then, coaches decision.

Iowa wasn't in on many good players Fran's first few years, he wouldn't have any trouble filling another one now.

I know they would have liked to have been able to get Jeremy Morgan and or possibly Lohause the year they only had 1 to give to Jok.

Obviously I'm not arguing anyone should walkon if there's no need. But obviously you cannot argue that having the flexibility to potentially add a 14th in the right situation is an asset.

 

[buttermypancakes]

You don't need to keep the guys that aren't in the top ten of the rotation happy, that's the point.

If they are going into their third year and not in the top ten then it's actually much better if they leave.

Recruiting is an inexact science, not everyone works out.

Case in point Fran tried to recruit over Clemmons. Clemmons got more motivated and stepped up. Dickerson turned out to be a dud and left, then Fran was able to sign Christian Williams with that free up scholy.

To me there's no common sense argument that less assets and flexibility is a better thing.

In theory it's an asset but you also have to believe getting a kid to commit when you already have that many scholarship players would be a tough sell. As has been stated with Creighton it took a crazy circumstance for that to ever come into play.

 

[DanL53]

Iowa wasn't in on many good players Fran's first few years, he wouldn't have any trouble filling another one now.

I know they would have liked to have been able to get Jeremy Morgan and or possibly Lohause the year they only had 1 to give to Jok.

Obviously I'm not arguing anyone should walkon if there's no need. But obviously you cannot argue that having the flexibility to potentially add a 14th in the right situation is an asset.[/QUOTE]

No, not arguing that as it is what I was saying.

 

[RocknRollface]

In theory it's an asset but you also have to believe getting a kid to commit when you already have that many scholarship players would be a tough sell. As has been stated with Creighton it took a crazy circumstance for that to ever come into play.

A normal highschooler sure, but at the same time you could use something like that to stow away a project guy with allot of upside whos not going to play for two or three years anyway, like an Olesani type. The other extreme is an impact 5th year guy or one and done type who comes available late. Theres alot of possible scenarios and it can change from year to year.

Considering there will be what, 6 or 7 years of this option available to him I would be surprised if hes not evaluating his roster and potential recruits with it at least in the back of his mind.

Like I said, I don't know the rules, but If what was posted above is true and walkons get all the same training and academic benefits other than free tuition then theres nothing unfair about it to Frans kids, just money out of his pocket.

If the benefits aren't the same then theres no way it happens as it would be unfair to the kids.

 

[iahawkeyes17]

Iowa wasn't in on many good players Fran's first few years, he wouldn't have any trouble filling another one now.

I know they would have liked to have been able to get Jeremy Morgan and or possibly Lohause the year they only had 1 to give to Jok.

Obviously I'm not arguing anyone should walkon if there's no need. But obviously you cannot argue that having the flexibility to potentially add a 14th in the right situation is an asset.

Iowa had 3 new players last year and took Ellington over Lohaus. He graduated a year after jok and Morgan.