Iowa is simply over-rated at #3 or #4.....just doesn't pass the 'eye test'...

[Joes Place]

...per MOST of the national pundits.
Iowa just doesn't have the recruiting classes that the Big Boys have.

How can you expect to compete with guys like-

Parker Hesse:

Recruiting stars: **
Position ranking: NR
National ranking: NR
State ranking (Iowa): 8​

University of Iowa defensive end Parker Hesse has been named Big Ten Conference Freshman of the Week for his performance in Iowa's 28-20 win at Nebraska.
The Big Ten honor is the first for Hesse (6-foot-3, 240-pounds), a native of Waukon, Iowa (Waukon HS), who redshirted in 2014.
C.J. Beathard:

Recruiting stars: ***
Position ranking: NR
National ranking: NR
State ranking (Tennessee): 24​

QB C.J. Beathard earned the offensive Big Ten Player of the Week award following Iowa's win at Iowa State

Marshall Koehn:

Recruiting stars: none
Position ranking: NR
National ranking: NR
State ranking (Iowa): NR​

PK Marshall Koehn was the special teams winner after Iowa's last-second victory over Pittsburgh

Desmond King:

Recruiting stars: ***
Position ranking: 73
National ranking: NR
State ranking (Michigan): 16
​

DB Desmond King earned co-defensive honors for his play in Iowa's win at Wisconsin; also currently shares the all-time interceptions in season record with Nile Kinnick and Lou King, and leads the nation in interceptions for the 2015 season

Jordan Canzeri:

Recruiting stars: **
Position ranking: NR
National ranking: NR
State ranking (New York): NR
​

RB Jordan Canzeri garnered the offensive honor for his play in a win over Illinois; he's also ripped off some of the longest TD runs in recent years.

Akrum Wadley:

Recruiting stars: **
Position ranking: NR
National ranking: NR
State ranking (New Jersey): NR​

RB Akrum Wadley collected the offensive honor for his play in a win at Northwestern

​

I mean....SERIOUSLY....Iowa just doesn't have the 'recruiting stars' on paper to compete in the Big Ten conference; maybe you'll win 3 or 4 conference games with a bunch of 2-star recruits and make a low-level bowl game every few years.

But you'll NEVER field a championship caliber team...


(CONGRATS to ALL OF THE HAWKEYES THIS SEASON WHO HAVE CONTRIBUTED SO MUCH IN SETTING AN ALL-TIME REGULAR SEASON WINS RECORD....AND PROVING THE 'EXPERTS' COMPLETELY WRONG)

'Stars' don't matter. Hard work, dedication, team focus and a drive to develop and improve matter.

Info from:
http://iowa.forums.rivals.com/threads/parker-hesse-named-big-ten-freshman-of-the-week.66284/
All '*' ratings from Rivals/Yahoo sources.

FWIW....Drew Ott was 'just' a 3-star recruit from Nebraska....

 

[Qued18]

Give KF and his staff all the coaching awards.

If you watch enough sports shows..ESPN Fox BTN etc..the former players and former coaches give Iowa credit for the way they play.

Guys like Cowturd and Finebum never played the game and don't appreciate fundamentals of football.

Herbstriet surprises me with his lack of respect for what Iowa has done. Maybe he's towing the company line or just being a Buckeye homer.

 

[nu2u]

Iowa's starting OTs were both unrated non-scholarship athletes with zero additional Division1 offers on signing day.

 

[Pepperman]

If you read some of the posts in the thread soybean started, many of us Hawkeye fans aren't even sure what we have here this year.

 

[Qued18]

If you read some of the posts in the thread soybean started, many of us Hawkeye fans aren't even sure what we have here this year.

I'm not sure either. I certainly wasn't expecting this type of year. Team chemistry/unity/moxie etc is the best I've seen in an Iowa team.

 

[Jonesingforhawkeyes]

These media idiots that think a team has to have 4 & 5 star recruits to be nationally relevant need to put on some pads and go out and practice with the HAWKS. After getting run over by JC,LDjr.,AW or trying to run the ball on the defense or even catch a pass from CJ. When the get popped once or twice then they will see the stars the HAWKEYES are lacking.

 

[grosie#2]

When Alabama has 60 plus 4-5 star recruits on their roster or Ohio State has 50 plus on theirs, it's easy for them to miss on 4 or 5 guys they recruit. It's also easier to establish depth when each position has 1-2 four-five star recruits as backups.

Iowa doesn't have that luxury. They have to count on recruiting potential and developing it. Miss on 4-5 recruits and it's a bad recruiting yr. I do believe that Iowa has better coaches then a lot of the big name schools because they have to work harder to make Iowa good.

Iowa's coaches and their players deserve a lot of credit this season for all they have accomplished. I wouldn't count them out in any game.

 

[TankHawk]

Nebraska fans don't think the Hesse pick six should count. After all, 2 star recruits can't do that.

 

[Medill90]

Northwestern fan here.

Iowa is not overrated. Walked into a Chicago bar Saturday to watch the NU v. Illinois game and an old gent was sitting at the bar wearing an Iowa cap. I'll tell you what I told him. No team got better every week like Iowa. A testament to fine coaching and player commitment. Fun to watch.

Congrats on a great season and best of luck the next three games.

 

[GPRHAWK]

I'd like to ask Cowherd whether high school star ratings or players in the NFL are more indicative of the talent in a program. I'm sure we've dropped off in the numbe of players in the NFL compared to when we were in the top 5 for all schools (around 2005-2010). I bet we are still in the top 10-20 range though.

 

[iahawkeyes17]

I'd like to ask Cowherd whether high school star ratings or players in the NFL are more indicative of the talent in a program. I'm sure we've dropped off in the numbe of players in the NFL compared to when we were in the top 5 for all schools (around 2005-2010). I bet we are still in the top 10-20 range though.

All I'd say to idiots like Cowherd who criticize Iowa and who talk about the lack of star players are yes Iowa has zero 5* players when they were 18 coming out of HS. However over the years we have definitely had some 5* talent when guys are 21-22 yrs old upper classmen.

Point and case King and Blythe this year. Plus I'd take CJ over any QB in the SEC.

 

[HawkCapt1912]

It's kind of odd. Ferentz offers a kid and some of the Big Boys take notice and offer, too.

Ferentz is usually in on the better of the under the radar kids before most.

Bielma made a career recruiting OL that we offered.

 

[hawkifann]

I think the star ratings and recent history arguments come into play when you're evaluating a team before the season starts. When we start looking at 2016, we'll start looking at what they did in 2015 and what players they have coming back. Where they have gaps, how good did the recruiting look? I think, while that's not perfect, it's a fine and fair measure....but when you get 6, 7, 8, 10, 12 games into a season, they are what you see on the field, not what they were on paper before the year started. It's a "show-me" world and that's fine, but at some point, you have to move off the pre-season "on-paper" narrative on a lot of teams.

The national media always has a hard time with teams that don't have style points. There have been a lot of years that tOSU has gotten (sometimes rightfully) hammered for squeaking by teams like Indiana, Illinois and Minnesota....but then a lot of years, they wind up delivering in the end.

The key point is that no team has to be the best team in the country every Saturday. You just have to be better than your opponent on the day you play them. So far, Iowa has been better than every opponent they've faced on gameday. You do that 15 times, you're the national champion.

 

[DrVenkman]

All I'd say to idiots like Cowherd who criticize Iowa and who talk about the lack of star players are yes Iowa has zero 5* players when they were 18 coming out of HS. However over the years we have definitely had some 5* talent when guys are 21-22 yrs old upper classmen.

Point and case King and Blythe this year. Plus I'd take CJ over any QB in the SEC.

As they have all year, let them criticize.

Big 10 fans know good wins. Unless they are Nebraska fans, who to this day I can not believe just how angry they are. Almost everyone I speak to knows how hard it is to run the table in the Big 10. Did Iowa get lucky this year. Yes. Would they be 12-0 if they had played O$U, MSU, UM ? Probably not. But who cares really? Iowa has a great shot at MSU. If they lose I am not going to give a single care to what the media says. Iowa has had a great year. I feel somewhat fortunate that Iowa doesn't have to play OSU in a dome, on carpet, with a healthy squad. I bet most MSU fans would honestly say the same. I am sure they feel pretty fortunate, given their year and some of the games they have played, that they get to play Iowa. It makes sense.

Iowa has a SoS of 65 and that is quite a bit lower than the closest comps. I cant get upset by some guy on TV who doesn't jump around saying "Yes Iowa makes sense, they would definitely beat O$U, Bama or whomever" All that said - Iowa has another game. It is one that they can win. I certainly didn't predict a Big 10 championship this year.

 

[theIowaHawk]

What is so wrong with admitting we are probably "overrated"? Why as that seen as such an attack?

The vast majority of posters on here were doomsday-scenario-ing this entire season and they KNEW who the players were. Hell, some of the loudest complaints was about those players themselves (except CJB).

Would Iowa be 12-0 if we played juggernauts each week? Surely not, the evidence is out there how damned hard it is to go undefeated. If Iowa played MSU and OSU and Alabama and Oklahoma, surely no team would go undefeated. But none of that really matters. What it comes down to is how you do your ranking. If you are doing it as a "snapshot", it would be damned hard to keep Iowa out. If you are doing it as a "who I think is the best in the country come January 9th", I can certainly understand the people shoving Iowa aside, they don't think Iowa can win a playoff game, let alone 2.

Guess what? Those same people who don't think Iowa could beat MSU, don't think they can beat Clemson/Bama/Ok, can still rationalize Iowa being 12-0. Those same doomsday-fans were crowing about this schedule all preseason and STILL believed it was a minimum 6 loss year.

So what? As hawkifann says above: "The key point is that no team has to be the best team in the country every Saturday. You just have to be the better than your opponent on the day you play them. So far, Iowa has been better than every opponent they've faced on gameday. You do that 15 times, you're the national champion." And they don't believe we will do that on Saturday, nor December 31, nor in January, therefore Iowa gets rated lower.

Again, so what. They don't get a say in it when Iowa wins. That much has been proven. Get over the butthurt, ffs.

And if you want to call me out, feel free to check my posts prior to the season starting, I was right there with soybean on predicting a very fun season. But, hell I didn't imagine this, nor did I imagine the rankings would come this quickly. There was a thread specifically predicting when Iowa would be ranked and I think I said Iowa might not be ranked until 9-0. I was wrong, we got respect long before that.

 

[93hawkeye]

I think the star ratings and recent history arguments come into play when you're evaluating a team before the season starts. When we start looking at 2016, we'll start looking at what they did in 2015 and what players they have coming back. Where they have gaps, how good did the recruiting look? I think, while that's not perfect, it's a fine and fair measure....but when you get 6, 7, 8, 10, 12 games into a season, they are what you see on the field, not what they were on paper before the year started. It's a "show-me" world and that's fine, but at some point, you have to move off the pre-season "on-paper" narrative on a lot of teams.

The national media always has a hard time with teams that don't have style points. There have been a lot of years that tOSU has gotten (sometimes rightfully) hammered for squeaking by teams like Indiana, Illinois and Minnesota....but then a lot of years, they wind up delivering in the end.

The key point is that no team has to be the best team in the country every Saturday. You just have to be better than your opponent on the day you play them. So far, Iowa has been better than every opponent they've faced on gameday. You do that 15 times, you're the national champion.

Re: style points...as long as the College Football Championship has an element of subjectivity, style points matter. Nobody cares about NFL teams getting style points because they earn their way into the playoffs and succeed there solely on their performance. College is not like this, so we get a committee judging who is deserving and who's not. Kirk has an NFL mentality and it works in a lot of ways, but it works against him in recruiting and impressing the voters.

 

[milehighhawkeye24]

What is so wrong with admitting we are probably "overrated"? Why as that seen as such an attack?

The vast majority of posters on here were doomsday-scenario-ing this entire season and they KNEW who the players were. Hell, some of the loudest complaints was about those players themselves (except CJB).

Would Iowa be 12-0 if we played juggernauts each week? Surely not, the evidence is out there how damned hard it is to go undefeated. If Iowa played MSU and OSU and Alabama and Oklahoma, surely no team would go undefeated. But none of that really matters. What it comes down to is how you do your ranking. If you are doing it as a "snapshot", it would be damned hard to keep Iowa out. If you are doing it as a "who I think is the best in the country come January 9th", I can certainly understand the people shoving Iowa aside, they don't think Iowa can win a playoff game, let alone 2.

Guess what? Those same people who don't think Iowa could beat MSU, don't think they can beat Clemson/Bama/Ok, can still rationalize Iowa being 12-0. Those same doomsday-fans were crowing about this schedule all preseason and STILL believed it was a minimum 6 loss year.

So what? As hawkifann says above: "The key point is that no team has to be the best team in the country every Saturday. You just have to be the better than your opponent on the day you play them. So far, Iowa has been better than every opponent they've faced on gameday. You do that 15 times, you're the national champion." And they don't believe we will do that on Saturday, nor December 31, nor in January, therefore Iowa gets rated lower.

Again, so what. They don't get a say in it when Iowa wins. That much has been proven. Get over the butthurt, ffs.

And if you want to call me out, feel free to check my posts prior to the season starting, I was right there with soybean on predicting a very fun season. But, hell I didn't imagine this, nor did I imagine the rankings would come this quickly. There was a thread specifically predicting when Iowa would be ranked and I think I said Iowa might not be ranked until 9-0. I was wrong, we got respect long before that.

As a competitor, the last thing you want to be considered is over rated....

 

[hawkifann]

Re: style points...as long as the College Football Championship has an element of subjectivity, style points matter. Nobody cares about NFL teams getting style points because they earn their way into the playoffs and succeed there solely on their performance. College is not like this, so we get a committee judging who is deserving and who's not. Kirk has an NFL mentality and it works in a lot of ways, but it works against him in recruiting and impressing the voters.

It matters to a degree, obviously, and some scenarios will matter more than others. "Style points" are why Iowa had no margin for error this season. 'Bama and OU are up there with 1 loss, partly on name and rep and partly on style points. OSU may sneak back in for the same reasons. That said, there just haven't been many seasons where there have been 3+ undefeated teams. Most years, if you're P5 and undefeated, you're going to be in the playoffs somewhere and then have an opportunity to prove it out on the field.

 

[bravehawks1]

I think Ferentz proves that stars for an 18 year old are meaningless. Besides, aren't they typically based upon the number of offers received. Given Iowa's geographical location, the exposure of many FB players is not noticed as quickly. coaches just have to get out and do their research and find those players with the heart to improve and succeed. This stat might be outdated by a year or two, but I think as recently as 2 years ago, Iowa had as many players in NFL as OSU.

And don't forget Hayden Fry's description of 5 star recruits: "Built like Tarzen, play like Jane"

 

[artradley]

Iowa's starting OTs were both unrated non-scholarship athletes with zero additional Division1 offers on signing day.

No way in the world can you compete with the big dogs with a couple of walk-ons on your offensive line. Can't happen.

 

[theIowaHawk]

As a competitor, the last thing you want to be considered is over rated....

I disagree. The last thing you want is to be proven overrated. Being the underdog and being overrated are basically the same thing. They are being told they can't beat MSU, you don't think that will motivate them?

On the other hand, finding out you are, in fact, overrated can be a killer. Look at OSU after that Michigan State loss, they were told they were the best and then completely deflated. Although they did come right back for UM.

 

[milehighhawkeye24]

I disagree. The last thing you want is to be proven overrated. Being the underdog and being overrated are basically the same thing. They are being told they can't beat MSU, you don't think that will motivate them?

On the other hand, finding out you are, in fact, overrated can be a killer. Look at OSU after that Michigan State loss, they were told they were the best and then completely deflated. Although they did come right back for UM.

well obviously it can be used as motivation and turned into a positive. It's like calling somebody a fat ass, obviously can be used to get into shape or stay in shape but nobody likes being called a fat ass....its much better to be considered underrated than overrated....negative things = motivation

 

[theIowaHawk]

well obviously it can be used as motivation and turned into a positive. It's like calling somebody a fat ass, obviously can be used to get into shape or stay in shape but nobody likes being called a fat ass....its much better to be considered underrated than overrated....negative things = motivation

Wait, so it has been a GOOD thing that 8/10 posters on here have been complaining about "Respect" for the last 9 weeks? I doubt UNC, or Houston, or Northwestern like being "underrated".

 

[hawkifann]

I think Ferentz proves that stars for an 18 year old are meaningless. Besides, aren't they typically based upon the number of offers received. Given Iowa's geographical location, the exposure of many FB players is not noticed as quickly. coaches just have to get out and do their research and find those players with the heart to improve and succeed. This stat might be outdated by a year or two, but I think as recently as 2 years ago, Iowa had as many players in NFL as OSU.

And don't forget Hayden Fry's description of 5 star recruits: "Built like Tarzen, play like Jane"

Saying they're meaningless is too strong, I think, but looking just at recruiting ratings as a way to measure football teams several years later is overly simplistic. If I can pick 20 HS 5-star RBs and you pick any other 20 2-3-4-star RBs, you're going to get some good ones, but on average, my group is probably going to be better -- not perfect, but better on the whole. Where things really get tricky and start looking simplistic is when you look at guys who become something different in college than they were projected to be coming out of HS. Iowa gets a lot of LBs and QBs with no real intention of playing them at LB and QB. Dallas Clark became a Mackey winner. Marvin McNutt become an all-time Iowa great at WR. How do you grade those guys out? Then, obviously there are guys like Chad Greenway who play against really small-time competition (he was SD 8-man football), but have the frame and athleticism to become something more.

What the ratings can't measure is "fit". Go get a 5-star pro-style passing QB and put him in a read-option spread offense where he'll be moving around and doing things other than being a pro-style passer or get a kid like Denard Robinson and put him in a pocket-passing offense and you're greatly increasing the chances of a bust. I cringe when I hear fans say "stars don't matter" or "recruiting ratings are meaningless". They're not meaningless and they do matter.....but they're not everything. Iowa has had success because they've recruited a lot of guys and had a development vision ready and waiting. A guy may come in as a 2-star LB, but they see him becoming a TE....or he might be a 3-star TE who has the frame to add 40 pounds and become an OG....or they might find an overlooked 2-star DL who has a very specific strength that the coaches think will work really, really well in Iowa's scheme.

 

[Yug]

I bet most MSU fans would honestly say the same. I am sure they feel pretty fortunate, given their year and some of the games they have played, that they get to play Iowa. It makes sense.

I don't think MSU feels fortunate, there's no team in the West that poses more of a threat than an undefeated one. There is no Ohio St. I'd prefer a 2 loss conf team limping in like Alabama gets with Florida.

There's a pretty big difference, MSU already had to play @OSU and @UofM (who I don't think is any better than Wiscy at this point, but we played them when their D-line was at full health).

BTW, I think all those who just think OSU had a bad week because of motivation and the rain. They're grossly overstating it. MSU kicked their butts at the line of scrimmage and gift-wrapped OSU it's only two TDs, one on a ridiculous muff punt. OSU had 5 first downs and MSU is the only team to beat them in recent years. They were motivated, MSU's D has made big strides of late. Especially tackling in space with the back 4. D is for real.

 

[MAXIMUSHAWKEYE]

I think we can compete with anyone in the trenches. The difference is skill athletes and OSUs are always going to be deep at those positions. We are great this year because of CJ. He is the difference. Anything happens to him and we are fubar. He can make the throws and run. Great decisions.

 

[MAXIMUSHAWKEYE]

I think we can compete with anyone in the trenches. The difference is skill athletes and OSUs are always going to be deep at those positions. We are great this year because of CJ. He is the difference. Anything happens to him and we are fubar. He can make the throws and run. Great decisions.

 

[b10fn]

These media idiots that think a team has to have 4 & 5 star recruits to be nationally relevant need to put on some pads and go out and practice with the HAWKS. After getting run over by JC,LDjr.,AW or trying to run the ball on the defense or even catch a pass from CJ. When the get popped once or twice then they will see the stars the HAWKEYES are lacking.

I'm as excited about this year as much as anyone, but let's take a breath & beat a roster that is chock full of 4 & 5 stars before we start crowing too much here. I get all of the overachieving & draft picks & yada...yada..yada, but the real test will come in a playoff where we have to line up against the blue bloods that are loaded with the talent you are making fun of. Let's see if we have the same opinion then. It was a year ago when Tennessee had their way with us when it looked like our talent was extremely poor in comparison.

 

[GPRHAWK]

What is so wrong with admitting we are probably "overrated"? Why as that seen as such an attack?

The vast majority of posters on here were doomsday-scenario-ing this entire season and they KNEW who the players were. Hell, some of the loudest complaints was about those players themselves (except CJB).

Would Iowa be 12-0 if we played juggernauts each week? Surely not, the evidence is out there how damned hard it is to go undefeated. If Iowa played MSU and OSU and Alabama and Oklahoma, surely no team would go undefeated. But none of that really matters. What it comes down to is how you do your ranking. If you are doing it as a "snapshot", it would be damned hard to keep Iowa out. If you are doing it as a "who I think is the best in the country come January 9th", I can certainly understand the people shoving Iowa aside, they don't think Iowa can win a playoff game, let alone 2.

Guess what? Those same people who don't think Iowa could beat MSU, don't think they can beat Clemson/Bama/Ok, can still rationalize Iowa being 12-0. Those same doomsday-fans were crowing about this schedule all preseason and STILL believed it was a minimum 6 loss year.

So what? As hawkifann says above: "The key point is that no team has to be the best team in the country every Saturday. You just have to be the better than your opponent on the day you play them. So far, Iowa has been better than every opponent they've faced on gameday. You do that 15 times, you're the national champion." And they don't believe we will do that on Saturday, nor December 31, nor in January, therefore Iowa gets rated lower.

Again, so what. They don't get a say in it when Iowa wins. That much has been proven. Get over the butthurt, ffs.

And if you want to call me out, feel free to check my posts prior to the season starting, I was right there with soybean on predicting a very fun season. But, hell I didn't imagine this, nor did I imagine the rankings would come this quickly. There was a thread specifically predicting when Iowa would be ranked and I think I said Iowa might not be ranked until 9-0. I was wrong, we got respect long before that.

We may not be the third or fourth best team in the country, but outside a couple teams I think we can play with anyone. We'll know a lot more about that in the next couple games.
Now, if we had played Michigan and OSU instead of Indiana and Maryland and lost would we still be in the top 10 with a 10-2 record, and if so would we be considered overrated? My guess is we would not be in the top 10 and if we were, we would be considered by most to be overrated. Meanwhile teams like Stanford, FSU, and ND with 2 losses and a less difficult schedule would still be in the top 10 and not considered overrated. It's really hard for media and pollsters to overcome their biases.

 

[hansenhawk]

They are right, we don't have these "amazing athletes" making wow plays, we don't have high rated players. I get why people don't believe in us.

What we do have though is a team that plays together, doesn't make mistakes, wins the turnover battles. This team does the little things it needs to do to WIN football games.

It IS the ultimate "we're not sexy" team, and the pundits only want sexy.

You can win football games being fundamentally sound tho too.

 

[Pepperman]

I would say Iowa's "identity" right now (meaning our national brand) is that we play solid fundamentals and don't beat ourselves. That's fine. That's probably what Kirk and Co would want the team's identity to be. Do this for 3-4 years straight and the narrative would be "Iowa's undefeated, and we know they are just so fundamentally sound that most teams shouldn't want to play them AND they do belong"

 

[Jonesingforhawkeyes]

I have to agree with hansenhawk here. The HAWKEYES do not play sexy football. SO WHAT! The HAWKEYES do not have amazing athletes making the wow plays. SO WHAT!! The HAWKEYES do not have a bunch 4 & 5 star recruits. SO WHAT!!!
What the HAWKEYES do have is a "fundamentally sound" football team. The HAWKEYES play week to week game to game. Winning the turnover battle, trying to play mistake free, playing to get the lead and to not lose it.

 

[theIowaHawk]

I think we can compete with anyone in the trenches. The difference is skill athletes and OSUs are always going to be deep at those positions. We are great this year because of CJ. He is the difference. Anything happens to him and we are fubar. He can make the throws and run. Great decisions.

Feel free to tell many players that, like Canzeri.

 

[lonhawk]

All I'd say to idiots like Cowherd who criticize Iowa and who talk about the lack of star players are yes Iowa has zero 5* players when they were 18 coming out of HS. However over the years we have definitely had some 5* talent when guys are 21-22 yrs old upper classmen.

Point and case King and Blythe this year. Plus I'd take CJ over any QB in the SEC.

Cowherd is essentially promoting Iowa by his negative comments. Funny thing is he doesn't even know it. Go Hawks!

 

[milehighhawkeye24]

Wait, so it has been a GOOD thing that 8/10 posters on here have been complaining about "Respect" for the last 9 weeks? I doubt UNC, or Houston, or Northwestern like being "underrated".

It doesn't matter what the posters think, I am talking about competitors not people sitting on a computer. I am not saying anybody likes to be considered underrated, but I can tell you it from my experience it is a heck of a lot better to be underrated than overrated....

 

[mthawkeyes]

I read (on here I think) that neither New England nor Seattle have any 5*-rated players on their rosters. I wonder if those franchises are aware of their talent deficit, and what their respective GMs plan to do to remedy the problem.