Bruner decommits.
- Thread starter cb_Iowa
- Start date
I don't disagree, trying to take the high road. Glad it is now. I remember when my first girl friend and I broke up, my Pops said, son, plenty of fish in the sea!
The only thing I've noticed is he started out being ranked in the 600s area on 247 composite and has fallen like around 800 spots since. I'm thinking this might be more mutual than we think. I'm confident Iowa gets an upgrade from this.
I would be very surprised if Bruner received a Wisconsin offer. I would not be surprised to see him camp at Wisconsin in the next few months though.
Actually after seeing his performance at the opening, maybe the staff told him his best bet was to look elsewhere. He performed pretty badly.
If I was 17 or 18 and a XXX school gave me a call I'd probably want to check them out too, if anything just for a "visit"
I knew exactly what I wanted at 17 and 18
Honestly, most of us have no idea what it's like to be recruited as a D1 athlete in 2017. In fact, most of us have no idea what its like to be recruited by as an athlete ever. With adults constantly wanting news on what kids are doing, what they're thinking, which way they are leaning, etc., its honestly shame on us, the adults, more than its shame on this kid. Think about how you would handle social media and 15, 16, 17 years of age. The truth is, you have no idea that you'd be any different than how kids these days are handling it. That's the truth.
He owes you nothing, but you find it appropriate to swear at him and call him an attention whore and attack his character. Your comments say more about your character AS AN ADULT than it says about some kid trying to make one of the most important decisions of his life. It drives me nuts when Husker fans do the same thing. The kid wants to make the best decision for himself, calm the hell down and let him do that and stop wishing he'd make the decision that is best for you. Grow up.
You got me. Throw in beer and that make 2 things I knew I wanted!I knew exactly what I wanted at 17 and 18
Your coddling remarks are exactly why so many of today's athletes have a sense of entitlement.
You seem to indicate that they are not mature enough to make responsible decisions at that age. I call bs to that.
Arnold Palmer (RIP) never signed a contract with his agent, when asked why ? He replied " We don't need a contract, we shook hands ".
Usually we try to replace what we lose. After the '16 season we didn't lose ANY LBs ... and yet we still took on 2 guys who project there (Wieland and Colbert). Then after the '17 season, we'll be losing 4 guys to graduation (Jewell, Niemann, Bower, and Ward).
Back for the '16 class, when we took in all those LB recruits, part of the idea was to replenish a little bit of a shortfall at LB because we had lost a number of guys to attrition (Spearman, Outsey, Wilson, and Jinning) and due to graduation (Fisher and Perry). So what happened? We took on 5 LB-types and Ward moved from safety to OLB.
The coaches may have thought, in the back of their minds, about possibly moving Nick Niemann or Kristian Welch over to TE. However, given our TE recruiting AND the fact that Cook moved over to TE ... that probably solidified them staying at LB.
Lastly, given the numbers of the LBs and the fact that not everybody can start ... the coaches may have figured that they'd suffer some attrition at LB after the end of the spring. That may have informed how they were going to recruit at LB. However, I'm sure that the coaches conduct post-camp interviews with the players - to get a vibe on how they're feeling and what they want to do. It's possible that through those interviews, the coaches found that all the LBs on the roster are happy and intent on "staying put." If that is the case, then it is possible that IF the coaches really project the '17 class guys as I suggested earlier ... then it could be that we might already be full at LB with just one or two LBs in the '18 class. Consequently, they may have cooled on Brunner some ... or maybe just not kept recruiting him as hard ... thereby allowing them to put a hold on their LB recruiting until later in the game. That way they can evaluate more guys - because, as I mentioned in my earlier post, the coaches surely have evaluated plenty of film and have their collective eyes on quite a number of prospective LBs.
Anyhow, interesting question - thanks for making me think about it. On face value, given that we were graduating 4 guys, my knee-jerk reaction would have been that we'd take at least 3 LBs in the class. That very well could be an overestimate. I also was assuming some attrition at LB. However, a bunch of those young guys might be seeing the '18 season as ripe with opportunity ... since so many LB spots are opening up all at once.
I think what he is doing is very mature. He recognized that he made a wrong decision to commit when he did, he publicly admitted it, and now he is going to reevaluate. I don't know how much more mature he could handle it.
More irony from you: you fail to recognize that your reaction to the kid's decommitment indicates a severe lack of maturity and perspective on your part, the same maturity you expect of a kid probably much younger than you.
Couple with the fact that you have absolutely no idea what is going on in this kid's life, and you are the one that feels entitled to blast him on a social message board. Hmm.
My comments aren't coddling, what I'm saying is that you don't know what its like. it's called not rushing to conclusions and knee-jerk reactions and judgments to situations of which you are completely naive. It has nothing to do with coddling. it has to do with seeking first to understand a situation before determining that you know the solution to the problem. Business and Dealing with People 101 stuff, really.
Last edited:
I doubt that I'm the only one that thinks this is what is happening. ..he accepted the Hawkeyes offer as a guarantee to have a D-1 spot and he now has other suitors. Knowing what occurred last year, this is believable.
Lol - the head coach cut bait you waterheads.
Good to see ol Kirk processing a bad eval, but he never should have been offered a scholly in the first place.
Good to see ol Kirk processing a bad eval, but he never should have been offered a scholly in the first place.
I'd echo this sentiment. If the commitment was stated, but now needs to be changed, the most mature way I can think to approach it is to step up, admit the error, and move forward. I wouldn't want him to keep with it "just because." His word means more for standing up to his error than otherwise.
I think giving verbals only means one thing:
Other schools recruit you that much harder
UNTIL they sign the dotted line ... I'm over being too concerned about what's going through the mind of a 17 year-old ... Good luck to him ...
Other schools recruit you that much harder
UNTIL they sign the dotted line ... I'm over being too concerned about what's going through the mind of a 17 year-old ... Good luck to him ...
One issue with what spoke of - why did he bother to commit so early in the first place? Why was he on record stating that he would have signed with Iowa during the early signing period ... just a very short while ago?
I agree that drawing conclusions about entitlement is a bit premature at this point. I wouldn't judge the young man. I'd be far more irritated with the young man if he bailed on the Hawks in the 11th hour.
Agree that Iowa probably cut bait. Ran a 5.07 second forty at the opening, 4.3 shuttle, 31 inch vertical.....those are pretty bad numbers for a Big Ten linebacker. Now that I think about it, these numbers wouldn't even be good for a Division III linebacker.
Either way, I'm sure he's a nice kid, but Iowa isn't going to miss him IMO.
Either way, I'm sure he's a nice kid, but Iowa isn't going to miss him IMO.
Last edited:
I doubt that Iowa would cut bait solely on the basis of a poor showing at a 3rd party camp. If they did ask him to keep looking - it's likely attributable to scholarship arithmetic. Either that or it would relate to bad decisions made by the young man (either behavioral or academic) - but I doubt that would be the case.
I don't mean to imply that Iowa cut bait because of his combine performance, only that he perhaps did not progress athletically like the coaching staff was hoping. Similar to the Beneventi kid a few years ago.
Iowa very rarely does this and not certain they did in this case, however the most recent one I can think of is the QB Beneviti (sp?)...any others? Ooops, just saw post above...
Beneventi was dropped by the Hawks because the antics he demonstrated during the season once he lost the starting QB spot at the high school he transferred to. Had he continued to be a good teammate and continued to try to improve for his team ... my bet is that the coaches would have honored his scholarship offer. However, Jack did none of those things ... he essentially quit on his team ... so the Iowa coaches quit on him (and rightly so).
For the Hawks to drop Brunner, they would have had to have heard bad things about him from his high school coach. I doubt that will prove to be the case.
Honestly, a scenario that none of us have seemingly considered yet is this ... maybe his own poor performance at the opening led him to believe that he couldn't end up being a contributor for the Hawks. Consequently, maybe he feels like he could be a better contributor at a smaller school ... like UW Whitewater or some place like that (they're a powerhouse in their respective division).
Committing early is not the best move for a lot of these kids, maybe most of them.
Unfortunately it's the process in place currently and unlikely to change.
Unfortunately it's the process in place currently and unlikely to change.
The early signing period will lock guys to their commitments. This might lead to more recruits "tapping their brakes" in the process ... because there will be less fluidity. Thus, we might finally see the pace of football recruiting change ... maybe just a little.
Was it poor? I read something Rob Howe put together and made it sound like he performed well despite his slow 40.
I asked Mike Farrell (National Recruiting Director at Rivals.com + Yahoo Sports!) this question a few months back:
Me: "I read the other day that there have been over 600 decommits in the 2017 class. Is that a trend that has been going up over the years or is that a pretty average number? If it is trending up, what do you think are the main factors?"
Mike: "it goes up every year and a lack of early signing period is one reason, the need for attention by recruits is another and the free official visits also contribute. Here's a novel idea, if you commit you get only one official visit to the school of your choice. Put that in place and you'll see a whole lot less early commitments."
Me: "I read the other day that there have been over 600 decommits in the 2017 class. Is that a trend that has been going up over the years or is that a pretty average number? If it is trending up, what do you think are the main factors?"
Mike: "it goes up every year and a lack of early signing period is one reason, the need for attention by recruits is another and the free official visits also contribute. Here's a novel idea, if you commit you get only one official visit to the school of your choice. Put that in place and you'll see a whole lot less early commitments."
I'm sorry, but I had my sarcasm meter turned off when I read your post. Was that for real?
I'm sorry, but I had my sarcasm meter turned off when I read your post. Was that for real?
Why I am not going to diverge the true intent of the original post, I will add that I'm a Huskers fan & let you figure it out
Similar threads
