Iowa recruiting: the challenge

[Raptorpeeps]

The thread is in reference to Fran’s recruiting is it not? You can put Lickliter’s recruits in there too and calculate the numbers. No one is stopping you.

Fran has coached here nine years, not ten. Then again, accuracy isn’t really your thing now is it?

Fran is well into his tenth year here. He was hired in March 2010.

There’s probably a calculator on your phone if you need it.

In his tenth year, we currently have the 10th ranked class in a league of 14 teams which is actually about average for him (last year we were 12th) — one three star recruit and zero four stars that are not his son.

https://247sports.com/Season/2019-Basketball/CompositeTeamRankings/?Conference=Big-Ten

His overall record in the Big Ten is under .500 (.488 to be accurate). His average finish is between 6th and 7th place. Is that “competitive?” Sure. Does it make you want to run out and buy season tickets or merch?

Maybe there’s a t shirt that has ESPN rankings for Connor or one that says “took Tennessee to the brink”. If not, you can get another “back-2-back (tied) third place” t. Your old one is likely a little threadbare by now.

Lolz

 

[waterboy4582]

Lack of expectations in Iowa City doesn’t help. Make the sweet 16 in the next two years or fire Fran, can’t let the excuse makers have unlimited time.

 

[mtdew_fever]

What I am suggesting is that Iowa will never make a deep run in the NCAA tourney with 1 and done players. Less than 5 schools in the country can legit do it on a semi regular basis. The template is there....win with guys that are 20-22 years of age.

As for Texas Tech, the avg age of their roster was over 20 last year. They benefitted a ton from transfers and their team leader was a grad transfer. Their defensive guy in the paint was a 5th yr senior.

Fran wont win with to 50 recruits. He needs to focus in guys that fit and ones that can develop....not to mention pulling in grad transfers to fill the gaps.

So, what did I say that was incorrect. Your original post suggested that teams with almost all upperclassmen are usually the teams in the final four. That just isn't true, especially when Duke and KY are frequently there with mostly first and second year players. Having one or two upperclassmen is clearly helpful, but there is seldom more than one team out of four that is mostly upperclassmen. Texas Tech was the exception, and their best player was a soph I think. Wisconsin was another exception...

 

[iahawks10]

Fran is well into his tenth year here. He was hired in March 2010.

There’s probably a calculator on your phone if you need it.

In his tenth year, we currently have the 10th ranked class in a league of 14 teams which is actually about average for him (last year we were 12th) — one three star recruit and zero four stars that are not his son.

https://247sports.com/Season/2019-Basketball/CompositeTeamRankings/?Conference=Big-Ten

His overall record in the Big Ten is under .500 (.488 to be accurate). His average finish is between 6th and 7th place. Is that “competitive?” Sure. Does it make you want to run out and buy season tickets or merch?

Maybe there’s a t shirt that has ESPN rankings for Connor or one that says “took Tennessee to the brink”. If not, you can get another “back-2-back (tied) third place” t. Your old one is likely a little threadbare by now.

Lolz

Lolz. Who says lolz?

Fran has been here nine seasons which is how you calculate a coach’s tenure in sports. Since this thread is about recruiting and Fran has been able to recruit since day one, I’ll allow the ten years. I don’t like it, but I’ll allow it.

Fran’s recruiting has been 10th and 12th, probably averages slightly better than that yearly I’d assume. Yet, Iowa finishes on average well above that in the standings. Iowa also ranked 11th in Dan’s OP graph as ranked by other coaches, but Fran’s average finish is also well above that. So basically what you’re telling me is that Fran is doing more with less.

Fran averages a .488 B1G winning percentage and an average conference finish between 6-7 in conference. You asked if that is supposed to bring in season ticket holders and sell out CHA? That I can’t say, every fan is different. What I do know is Ferentz is .553 vs B1G competition with an average finish of 4.8 place in conference and fans flock to Kinnick every Saturday.

Where do I pick up one of those “took Tennessee to the brink” t-shirts? Maybe I could retire my “My Man Fran” T.

 

[Raptorpeeps]

Lolz. Who says lolz?

Fran has been here nine seasons which is how you calculate a coach’s tenure in sports. Since this thread is about recruiting and Fran has been able to recruit since day one, I’ll allow the ten years. I don’t like it, but I’ll allow it.

Fran’s recruiting has been 10th and 12th, probably averages slightly better than that yearly I’d assume. Yet, Iowa finishes on average well above that in the standings. Iowa also ranked 11th in Dan’s OP graph as ranked by other coaches, but Fran’s average finish is also well above that. So basically what you’re telling me is that Fran is doing more with less.

Fran averages a .488 B1G winning percentage and an average conference finish between 6-7 in conference. You if that is supposed to bring in season ticket holders and sell out CHA? That I can’t say, every fan is different. What I do know is Ferentz is .553 vs B1G competition with an average finish of 4.8 place in conference and fans flock to Kinnick every Saturday.

Where do I pick up one of those “took Tennessee to the brink” t-shirts? Maybe I could retire my “My Man Fran” T.

A coaches tenure starts the day they are hired, especially so if you’re focused on recruiting as you pointed out.

 

[BBHawk]

A coaches tenure starts the day they are hired, especially so if you’re focused on recruiting as you pointed out.

That is true, but the context of the hire also matters. McC took over a dumpster fire and had it back to 20-win seasons within 3 years. The season before last was a head-scratcher but it appears that he righted the ship last year, at least to get it respectable again.

 

[Raptorpeeps]

That is true, but the context of the hire also matters. McC took over a dumpster fire and had it back to 20-win seasons within 3 years. The season before last was a head-scratcher but it appears that he righted the ship last year, at least to get it respectable again.

“Respectable” is a fair description of the body of work.

If you can get excited about “respectable” heading into Fran’s tenth season, then you’re a mediocre AD’s dream fan.

Bully for you, sir!

 

[BBHawk]

“Respectable” is a fair description of the body of work.

If you can get excited about respectable heading into Fran’s tenth season, then you’re a mediocre AD’s dream fan.

Bully for you, sir!

I can see your side of things but I have been watching Iowa basketball for a long time (>50 years) and have seen much worse. I want to watch a team that has a chance to win almost any game and I feel this staff is capable of doing that with the players they recruit. I have seen staffs that can't recruit, staffs that can't retain the players they recruit, and staffs that can recruit but can coach the team to win, so when Iowa gets a staff that can put it all together, I am loath to replace them.

 

[Raptorpeeps]

I can see your side of things but I have been watching Iowa basketball for a long time (>50 years) and have seen much worse. I want to watch a team that has a chance to win almost any game and I feel this staff is capable of doing that with the players they recruit. I have seen staffs that can't recruit, staffs that can't retain the players they recruit, and staffs that can recruit but can coach the team to win, so when Iowa gets a staff that can put it all together, I am loath to replace them.

Perfectly reasonable. Hard to find fault with that view.

The only thing I take issue with are certain fans trying to convince themselves and others that Fran’s program is something other than it is — the regional power folks.

 

[iahawks10]

Perfectly reasonable. Hard to find fault with that view.

The only thing I take issue with are certain fans trying to convince themselves and others that Fran’s program is something other than it is — the regional power folks.

Regional powerhouse......

One guy asked a question almost two years ago if Iowa was becoming a regional powerhouse. You haven’t let it go since. Anyone can search regional powerhouse and see how much you bring it up. BTW, in that 3 page thread, 95% of the posters in it were laughing (or “lolz”) at the OP. One guy suggested that Iowa could win 13 B1G games that season, which you liked, until you saw how the season played out and began ridiculing him too.

 

[Raptorpeeps]

Regional powerhouse......

One guy asked a question almost two years ago if Iowa was becoming a regional powerhouse. You haven’t let it go since. Anyone can search regional powerhouse and see how much you bring it up. BTW, in that 3 page thread, 95% of the posters in it were laughing (or “lolz”) at the OP. One guy suggested that Iowa could win 13 B1G games that season, which you liked, until you saw how the season played out and began ridiculing him too.

95% my ass. You know as well as I do that there are plenty of people, including you, who constantly attempt to puff up Fran’s performance. Puff up his kid’s ranking/ability. Etc., etc.

You are a powerhouser. A back to back third placer. A brinkster. A habitual excuse maker. And you SHOULD be embarrassed to be called out about it because it is silly.

 

[BBHawk]

I have not seen anyone call Iowa a "Regional Powerhouse" in basketball since the 80s, and that was just for a few short years when Davis had Raveling's recruits.

IMHO, Iowa is still battling the perceptions that stuck to Iowa through the Alford and Lickliter years. McC has done a decent job of making Iowa a feisty opponent but I don't think it has gone beyond that yet. It could if a few more of the highly-ranked kids start coming to Iowa but McC needs more talent to exceed where he has brought the team. The staff is working on it.

 

[Raptorpeeps]

The staff is working on it.

My friend....

They’ve been “working on it” for 9.25 years.

How long do they get to actually perform?

Is it simply not reasonable to expect a conference title or a 4 or better seed or a sweet sixteen or at the very least a conference tourney championship?

Because again... this is year 10. In Bo Ryan’s first 10 years he won 3 league titles, 1 conference tourney title, had 3 sweet sixteen appearances and one elite eight appearance. Look at Painter’s first five years, Izzos, Beilein’s, Matta, Weber....

Do you really think a 60 year old coach is going to find another gear? Seriously. Do you?

 

[BBHawk]

My friend....

They’ve been “working on it” for 9.25 years.

How long do they get to actually perform?

Is it simply not reasonable to expect a conference title or a 4 or better seed or a sweet sixteen or at the very least a conference tourney championship?

Because again... this is year 10.

Do you really think a 60 year old coach is going to find another gear? Seriously. Do you?

Rome wasn't built in a day...

 

[And1Hawk]

My friend....

They’ve been “working on it” for 9.25 years.

How long do they get to actually perform?

Is it simply not reasonable to expect a conference title or a 4 or better seed or a sweet sixteen or at the very least a conference tourney championship?

Because again... this is year 10. In Bo Ryan’s first 10 years he won 3 league titles, 1 conference tourney title, had 3 sweet sixteen appearances and one elite eight appearance. Look at Painter’s first five years, Izzos, Beilein’s, Matta, Weber....

Do you really think a 60 year old coach is going to find another gear? Seriously. Do you?

I’m a long time fan and have attended many games at CHA. I am as realistic as it gets and my realism does not see your expectations as realistic at all which were; 4 seed or better, conference title and/or tourney title or sweet 16 or better. Can any of these happen? Yes, but are they realistic? Absolutely not. The data over the last 40 years over 5 coaches shows only brief flashes of really good but nothing sustained or consistent at that level.

The analysis of our conference opponents based on strength criteria is pretty fair and it has Iowa ranked #11 with a ranking of 12-14 in recruiting base, budget and facilities. Even ‘history/tradition’, and we’ve had some nice moments, has Iowa with a ranking of 9. That is objective analysis that has nothing to do with coaching. Yet, Fran has managed to exceed an 11th place finish many seasons so in some ways by measure, he’s done a nice job given the limitations of the job.

My realistic view is Iowa in all sports is a difficult job. Enjoy the brief flashes because there’s no promise of tomorrow’s outcome.

 

[iahawks10]

95% my ass. You know as well as I do that there are plenty of people, including you, who constantly attempt to puff up Fran’s performance. Puff up his kid’s ranking/ability. Etc., etc.

You are a powerhouser. A back to back third placer. A brinkster. A habitual excuse maker. And you SHOULD be embarrassed to be called out about it because it is silly.

Posting facts make me a powerhouser?

Help me out. Link some of my quotes puffing up any of FM’s kids. Link any quote where I ever referenced Iowa being any sort of powerhouse.

Embarrassed would be you sir, after you were punked in the Illini ranked 30th Sagarin thread. Still mad.

I have yet to see anyone call Iowa a regional powerhouse, but you make it seem fans are claiming it in every other post.

 

[HoustonREDHawk]

If I were grading Fran, I would give him a B-. It would be a little lower based purely on performance, but he deserves an A for the quality of the players he has brought in off the court.

 

[Legend12]

If I were grading Fran, I would give him a B-. It would be a little lower based purely on performance, but he deserves an A for the quality of the players he has brought in off the court.

That's an amazingly fair and accurate summation and grading.

 

[anon_wic6m41528ao4]

If I were grading Fran, I would give him a B-. It would be a little lower based purely on performance, but he deserves an A for the quality of the players he has brought in off the court.

I would completely agree. I defend Fran on here but I probably do give him too much credit. He's had paltry post-season success. Some people like to rip and rip and rip on him and his family, which isn't fair either. He puts on a competitive (not stellar) team but his players are rarely in the news for poor character decisions . . . except for Jok's dumbass on the moped.

If it weren't for the recent rose bowl, Kirk Ferentz would probably be in the B range as well.

 

[iahawks10]

I would completely agree. I defend Fran on here but I probably do give him too much credit. He's had paltry post-season success. Some people like to rip and rip and rip on him and his family, which isn't fair either. He puts on a competitive (not stellar) team but his players are rarely in the news for poor character decisions . . . except for Jok's dumbass on the moped.

If it weren't for the recent rose bowl, Kirk Ferentz would probably be in the B range as well.

As a known powerhouser, I would say that a B- grade is extremely fair, to maybe a little generous. The quality of kids Fran has brought in and doing it the right way has never been in question.

 

[L. Wade Childress]

I would completely agree. I defend Fran on here but I probably do give him too much credit. He's had paltry post-season success. Some people like to rip and rip and rip on him and his family, which isn't fair either. He puts on a competitive (not stellar) team but his players are rarely in the news for poor character decisions . . . except for Jok's dumbass on the moped.

If it weren't for the recent rose bowl, Kirk Ferentz would probably be in the B range as well.

I would hardly say that 3 trips to the round of 32 is “paltry”. Some programs that spend way more money than us would love to experience that success.

 

[SDHawkDoc]

As a known powerhouser, I would say that a B- grade is extremely fair, to maybe a little generous. The quality of kids Fran has brought in and doing it the right way has never been in question.

I see it slightly lower, C to C+, solely based on the lack of significant results in the NCAA tourney. Not enough total appearances and the obvious absence of a sweet 16 in 9 years keeps him in the mediocre neighborhood.

Maybe things will make a significant upward turn, but it seems unlikely that a 60 year old basketball coach in his 10th year at a school is going to be a lot different than what he's already shown up to this point.

 

[L. Wade Childress]

I see it slightly lower, C to C+, solely based on the lack of significant results in the NCAA tourney. Not enough total appearances and the obvious absence of a sweet 16 in 9 years keeps him in the mediocre neighborhood.

Maybe things will make a significant upward turn, but it seems unlikely that a 60 year old basketball coach in his 10th year at a school is going to be a lot different than what he's already shown up to this point.

Do you think it’s fair to judge his first three years the same as his last six years?

 

[Suterman]

I think we are seeing what Fran is going to do at Iowa. He has had mostly competitive teams with average to slightly above average talent. We will probably see a Sweet 16 in the next 5 years but that may be the pinnacle. This is Iowa Basketball over the last 40 years. Average +, not great.

 

[SDHawkDoc]

I think we are seeing what Fran is going to do at Iowa. He has had mostly competitive teams with average to slightly above average talent. We will probably see a Sweet 16 in the next 5 years but that may be the pinnacle. This is Iowa Basketball over the last 40 years. Average +, not great.

I'm very close to your position; slightly less optimistic.
I do agree that we've had more than enough time to see his approach and the results that will follow from that. To expect something significantly different is not realistic.

 

[r448chlpo]

The OP contains a chart which suggests that Iowa is the easiest conference school to get into. Is this true? If so, that is disappointing!

 

[L. Wade Childress]

The OP contains a chart which suggests that Iowa is the easiest conference school to get into. Is this true? If so, that is disappointing!

That’s the perception of other coaches.

 

[BBHawk]

That’s the perception of other coaches.

And I would question whether it is true. Time for a fact check.

 

[Fan In Black]

That’s the perception of other coaches.

Correct. Jeff Goodman polled B1G coaches to develop the chart. The whole story is here

 

[Hawkdiver]

I can say, with my son having just gone through the non-athlete application process, that for a regular student Iowa is not the easiest to get into but is close. The 3 easiest schools in the Big Ten to get in to are Rutgers, Nebraska, and Iowa so I would imagine the same would hold true for athletes.

The line between the hardest 11 and the easiest 3, in terms of admission, for my experience is not even close. We all know it is tough to get into NW and Mich but ILL is right there and WI, MN, IN, MD are pretty close as well.

I hate to say it, for an average (to below) student looking out of state Iowa and Nebraska are the only real options available in the Big Ten (Rutgers doesn't count because Rutgers).

 

[anon_wic6m41528ao4]

And I would question whether it is true. Time for a fact check.

https://www.univstats.com/comparison/big-ten-conference/admission/

According to this, Iowa has the highest admission rates of any B10 school. Other websites seem to back this up.

However, like any stat, this needs to be viewed in context. Iowa's high admission rates are a function of their low application rates. They have 40,000 LESS students apply than a school like Michigan. Furthermore, Iowa has less students apply than Penn St., Indiana, and Purdue have admitted. Iowa needs high admission rates to maintain a student body.

 

[littlez]

So L Wade, I didn't go back and look at how far some of the schools have advanced, but here are the number of appearances by schools since the 2009-2010 season. Ohio State 8, Purdue 8, Michigan State 10, (every year) Wisconsin 9, Minnesota 4, Iowa 4, Illinois 2, Michigan 8, Indiana 4, Nebraska 1, (went 13-5 in 17-18 and didn't make it?) . Maryland 4. NW 1, Penn State 1, Rutgers 0. M State clearly since Judd Heathcoat and obviously Izzo are the clear blue blood of the conference in bball. Wisconsin came from a program w/zero bball tradition to a true powerhouse under Bo. It can be done. They face the same recruiting challenges as us, and before him had no tradition. Oh State, Purdue, Michigan clearly have more tradition and more success than us. I guess you could say Indiana would be the only school that is considered a basketball school that has under-performed in the time frame since Fran has been here. 5 schools make it almost every year, 3 or 4 almost never make it, and the rest make it every 2-3 years. But I don't think your going to find many schools bragging about making the round of 32 3 times in 10 years.

 

[ketelmeister]

Am I the only one who thinks this thread is racist? Coaches recruit players who can play regardless of color. To try to connect skin color to a teams success is blatantly racists and demeaning to the players and coach.

 

[iahawks10]

So L Wade, I didn't go back and look at how far some of the schools have advanced, but here are the number of appearances by schools since the 2009-2010 season. Ohio State 8, Purdue 8, Michigan State 10, (every year) Wisconsin 9, Minnesota 4, Iowa 4, Illinois 2, Michigan 8, Indiana 4, Nebraska 1, (went 13-5 in 17-18 and didn't make it?) . Maryland 4. NW 1, Penn State 1, Rutgers 0. M State clearly since Judd Heathcoat and obviously Izzo are the clear blue blood of the conference in bball. Wisconsin came from a program w/zero bball tradition to a true powerhouse under Bo. It can be done. They face the same recruiting challenges as us, and before him had no tradition. Oh State, Purdue, Michigan clearly have more tradition and more success than us. I guess you could say Indiana would be the only school that is considered a basketball school that has under-performed in the time frame since Fran has been here. 5 schools make it almost every year, 3 or 4 almost never make it, and the rest make it every 2-3 years. But I don't think your going to find many schools bragging about making the round of 32 3 times in 10 years.

Illinois has most certainly underperformed in this time frame. Also I’m pretty sure Indiana has a couple of B1G championships in this time frame so I don’t know how much they’ve underperformed. They certainly haven’t been consistent.

 

[Raptorpeeps]

Embarrassed would be you sir, after you were punked in the Illini ranked 30th Sagarin thread. Still mad.

If you say so, I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt but I honestly have no idea what you’re talking about.

I get the feeling you take this stuff personally.

That’s a mistake.

 

[BBHawk]

https://www.univstats.com/comparison/big-ten-conference/admission/

According to this, Iowa has the highest admission rates of any B10 school. Other websites seem to back this up.

However, like any stat, this needs to be viewed in context. Iowa's high admission rates are a function of their low application rates. They have 40,000 LESS students apply than a school like Michigan. Furthermore, Iowa has less students apply than Penn St., Indiana, and Purdue have admitted. Iowa needs high admission rates to maintain a student body.

As yiu pointed out, that does not mean the standards are lower, just that the number of applicants is lower. They are unrelated stats.

Am I the only one who thinks this thread is racist? Coaches recruit players who can play regardless of color. To try to connect skin color to a teams success is blatantly racists and demeaning to the players and coach.

This thread is in response to a different, definitely racist thread. Although this ine has racist tones, the other thread is much more explicit and easy to find.

 

[iahawks10]

I get the feeling you take this stuff personally.

That’s a mistake.

That’s rich coming from a guy who said: “The only thing I take issue with are certain fans trying to convince themselves and others that Fran’s program is something other than it is”.

 

[Ihawkhoops]

Wisconsin does not try to play fast like Fran does. Fran recruits WI style players but tries to play MSU tempo. Did anyone imagine that when Fran was hired we would be talking about Gesell-Clemmons as our best back court combo in 2019? It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out if you want to play Fran's style you need guards who can a: attack, score and dish and b: defend. It's not like this is the mid 90's with the Fab 5 transforming college hoops from a half court big man-centric game to an open court NBA style of game.

And before the homers come out with the usual "Oh so you expect Fran to out-recruit the blue bloods and play players?" The answer is no. There are plenty of good kids out there who would come to Iowa but Fran is too enamored with his "culture and chemistry" bs that he sells on the I-Club circuit. Get off your high horse Fran and tap into the graduate transfer market IF you can't do better with traditional recruiting. Hell, even Cautions Kirk has opened his eyes to the value these guys can bring.

 

[Raptorpeeps]

That’s rich coming from a guy who said: “The only thing I take issue with are certain fans trying to convince themselves and others that Fran’s program is something other than it is”.

“Rich”?

Sure, dude. Rich.

 

[littlez]

IU might have a championship mixed in there but as a team that has expectations of winning national championships, just making the tournament 4 out of the last 10 years is way underachieving. They are probably the most tradition rich program in the league in a state that cares more about basketball than probably any other in the league. Probably agree w/you about Illinois.