ADVERTISEMENT

Recruiting Gains Over the Last 3 classes

HoustonHawkeye

HoustonHawkeye

HB MVP
Jan 3, 2003
1,629
815
113
Comparing past and projecting future players from different classes:

Year Rank Major Contributors
2014...59..........7
2015...58..........4
2016...42..........14
2017...40...........7 + additional ones TBD
2018...25-40......8-12 (pure guess work)

Looking at the 2015 class, we did not land as many under the radar players. But our success rate of players appears to be gaining with higher rated classes of 16 & 17. Landing Craddieth, Honas and Stepp, while keeping VanSumeren will help.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eternal Return, Wasnt-drunk-didnt-troll and RogerKint
kcgolfer said:
We still rank 9th in recruiting in the conference so far. That isn't great.
Click to expand...
Well, it depends on what service you look at (we're 8th on 247). And we only trail a couple schools because they have more commits. We should end up 6th after we get to 20 recruits. And I really don't think these ratings mean much.
 
  • Like
Reactions: INXS83 and cmhawks99
kcgolfer said:
We still rank 9th in recruiting in the conference so far. That isn't great.
Click to expand...
Average ranking is 5th or 6th...we have small class in comparison to teams ahead like Minny who somehow pulled an SEC and exceeded the 25 player limit. Iowa has 10 less players and doesn’t include Nixon-who oh btw got illegally contacted and offered by Bama. Definitely a huge upswing
 
  • Like
Reactions: ichawk24
Agreed ...it not what they come in rated aS ...it what they ranked when they leave. People get way to caught up in the rankings. Iowa is among the best at putting 2* guys in the NFL.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ichawk24
After the best 25-50 high school guys it is a complete crap shoot. It is BIG BIG BIG business and like anything else it is the next story or sentence that people latch onto. Until you realize it is potential that is being recruited and nothing else you will be enamored with HS highlight tapes against other HS players. Stars are bought by street agents or parents that are able to showcase their kid in the t-shirt and shorts Olympics. It is shown over and over again, at more than just Iowa, of kids that are walk-ons or barely recruited being key contributors. Iowa is one of the best at recruiting potential and coaching them up. I would much rather have a "coach" than a promise maker.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Muskie5, Birdmanil and cmhawks99
cocoem said:
After the best 25-50 high school guys it is a complete crap shoot. It is BIG BIG BIG business and like anything else it is the next story or sentence that people latch onto. Until you realize it is potential that is being recruited and nothing else you will be enamored with HS highlight tapes against other HS players. Stars are bought by street agents or parents that are able to showcase their kid in the t-shirt and shorts Olympics. It is shown over and over again, at more than just Iowa, of kids that are walk-ons or barely recruited being key contributors. Iowa is one of the best at recruiting potential and coaching them up. I would much rather have a "coach" than a promise maker.
Click to expand...


FWIW Rick Flair is an all time showman. Not sure why I've never said that. You've had that Avatar a long time.
 
cmhawks99 said:
Don't agree....these next few drafts will show their worth.
Click to expand...
True but I still want improved recruiting. Recruit and get commits from the highest rated guys long as they fit the ethos of the program. Plenty of upper echelon guys who would still sell out for the program the way are lower rated guys do. However, I can still see where the ratings can be a crapshoot.
 
Muskie5 said:
Well, it depends on what service you look at (we're 8th on 247). And we only trail a couple schools because they have more commits. We should end up 6th after we get to 20 recruits. And I really don't think these ratings mean much.
Click to expand...
Except for the fact that all the best teams recruit better than we do. Yes, we put a few 2 stars into the NFL but how many do we miss on???
 
kcgolfer said:
Except for the fact that all the best teams recruit better than we do. Yes, we put a few 2 stars into the NFL but how many do we miss on???
Click to expand...

A lot more than we hit on. But of course the confirmation bias sets in, proving that stars don’t matter. Let’s just get a whole class of walk-ons and two stars and save the recruiting budget if stars don’t matter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TRHawkeye145
kcgolfer said:
Except for the fact that all the best teams recruit better than we do. Yes, we put a few 2 stars into the NFL but how many do we miss on???
Click to expand...
And those same teams that get the best recruits every year have been getting the best recruits for 50 years regardless who the coaches are. Coaches that go to these blue blood schools aren't necessarily better 'recruiters' than KF, it's an institutional thing. Some of you just don't get 'it' and apparently never will. You have 'beliefs' and no amount of evidence can overcome that. Conventional beliefs and counterintuitive realities are dangerous banes for this country.
 
IAHawk2011 said:
A lot more than we hit on. But of course the confirmation bias sets in, proving that stars don’t matter. Let’s just get a whole class of walk-ons and two stars and save the recruiting budget if stars don’t matter.
Click to expand...
If the coaches who are recruiting and evaluating talent don't look at 'stars' and have no idea what 'stars' any particular kid has, then how do they matter? They matter to YOU, they don't matter to most coaches. That is a fact, look it up. There are hundreds of coaches out there who are better evaluators of talent than these 'scouts' and writers for these rating sites. These rating sites were started for and exist for one purpose and one purpose only; TO MAKE MONEY..... off over-zealous fans and athletes families who pony up hoping a 'star' will get their kid some advantage. It doesn't.
KF, like many other coaches, doesn't know how many 'stars' a kid has nor does he care. And if he would happen to care about 'stars', which rating service should he 'believe', since they disagree quite often. Have fun with your little 'star' beliefs, but try not get too worked up about it. It's not that important to anyone except over-zealous fans and these sites who 'created' an industry to make money. Period. Here's a little article about the recruiting process...show me where 'stars' come in. http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...-how-college-football-coaches-recruit-players
 
  • Like
Reactions: cmhawks99
IAHawk2011 said:
A lot more than we hit on. But of course the confirmation bias sets in, proving that stars don’t matter. Let’s just get a whole class of walk-ons and two stars and save the recruiting budget if stars don’t matter.
Click to expand...


Interestingly enough confirmation bias is alive and well on both sides. Currently trying to Google an article I read about Iowa a few years ago and the astronomical percentage of two stars they put in the NFL. I'm currently reading an article by a Michigan State writer opining the same philosophy for Michigan State and how their fans are always up in arms about their recruiting "rankings"....

You guys keep worrying about it I'm going to watch football.
 
IAHawk2011 said:
A lot more than we hit on. But of course the confirmation bias sets in, proving that stars don’t matter. Let’s just get a whole class of walk-ons and two stars and save the recruiting budget if stars don’t matter.
Click to expand...
Your whole statement is a contradiction and illogical. It stars don't matter (or even don't exist) how would you know who were 2 star recruits?

Maybe the Iowa coaching staff has graded every kid they offered as '4 stars' from their evaluation. Is their evaluation inferior to the evaluation of some yahoos, who couldn't cut it in coaching, so they went to work for rivals. Half the people that work for those services are just writers. These yahoos are making evaluations mainly based on highlight tapes (college coaches watch the whole game tape) and how they run around in shorts and tshirts in some camp.

If all these rating services and their 'stars' disappeared tomorrow what would change? How were things different BEFORE these services started? You guys act like college coaches would have no idea who to recruit without having a 'star' rating. The same schools got the same kids from the same footprints etc. prior to 'stars'. Somehow recruiting happened for decades and decades without any 'stars'.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cmhawks99
Good article on recruiting. It would be interesting to get a coaches perspective on recruiting and evaluating talent. My guess:
QB is the hardest position to evaluate HS talent
RB is the easiest position to evalute
Safeties can be developed
WR is pure talent driven
DL is easier to project success than OL
LB is more about character and drive than other positions
DB's is more about talent and projecting talent into skills
 
  • Like
Reactions: cmhawks99
Other than the usual critics there have been some really good insights in this thread.
 
Muskie5 said:
Your whole statement is a contradiction and illogical. It stars don't matter (or even don't exist) how would you know who were 2 star recruits?

Maybe the Iowa coaching staff has graded every kid they offered as '4 stars' from their evaluation. Is their evaluation inferior to the evaluation of some yahoos, who couldn't cut it in coaching, so they went to work for rivals. Half the people that work for those services are just writers. These yahoos are making evaluations mainly based on highlight tapes (college coaches watch the whole game tape) and how they run around in shorts and tshirts in some camp.

If all these rating services and their 'stars' disappeared tomorrow what would change? How were things different BEFORE these services started? You guys act like college coaches would have no idea who to recruit without having a 'star' rating. The same schools got the same kids from the same footprints etc. prior to 'stars'. Somehow recruiting happened for decades and decades without any 'stars'.
Click to expand...

You literally just created an argument out of thin air. Beautifully done strawman, and way to craft an argument that has nothing to do with my post.

My point is this- the fact is (and yes it is a fact) higher recruiting rankings is more correlative to wins than lower recruiting rankings. I am not suggesting or even insinuating that Iowa’s staff does, or should, consult with recruiting services or their rankings.

I have no doubt that Iowa’s staff is better at evaluating and developing lower recruited players than most schools. But there is not a high success rate of those players becoming studs. For every Josey Jewell or Josh Jackson, there are multiple Marcus Collins, Josh Brown, or Jonathon Parkers. The idea that recruiting rankings are not indicative of success because a handful of two-stars have become All-Americans at Iowa is laughably wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HoustonHawkeye
IAHawk2011 said:
You literally just created an argument out of thin air. Beautifully done strawman, and way to craft an argument that has nothing to do with my post.

My point is this- the fact is (and yes it is a fact) higher recruiting rankings is more correlative to wins than lower recruiting rankings. I am not suggesting or even insinuating that Iowa’s staff does, or should, consult with recruiting services or their rankings.

I have no doubt that Iowa’s staff is better at evaluating and developing lower recruited players than most schools. But there is not a high success rate of those players becoming studs. For every Josey Jewell or Josh Jackson, there are multiple Marcus Collins, Josh Brown, or Jonathon Parkers. The idea that recruiting rankings are not indicative of success because a handful of two-stars have become All-Americans at Iowa is laughably wrong.
Click to expand...


Please stop saying a handful, it used to be you guys would say I'm tired of hearing about Bob Sanders and Robert Gallery, etc.... well hear about this, 25+, that is not a handul ...25+ in the NFL is in fact a ton. Saying a handful is disingenuous and self-serving.

Also there is a correlation to wins, there is also a correlation to "not winning" Texas, A&M, ND, Florida, etc, etc, etc....how many etcs do you want?!

Every year some of these recruiting juggernauts are up & many are down....that also is a fact.

So recruiting "rankings" likely isn't the real key.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Muskie5
IAHawk2011 said:
You literally just created an argument out of thin air. Beautifully done strawman, and way to craft an argument that has nothing to do with my post.

My point is this- the fact is (and yes it is a fact) higher recruiting rankings is more correlative to wins than lower recruiting rankings. I am not suggesting or even insinuating that Iowa’s staff does, or should, consult with recruiting services or their rankings.

I have no doubt that Iowa’s staff is better at evaluating and developing lower recruited players than most schools. But there is not a high success rate of those players becoming studs. For every Josey Jewell or Josh Jackson, there are multiple Marcus Collins, Josh Brown, or Jonathon Parkers. The idea that recruiting rankings are not indicative of success because a handful of two-stars have become All-Americans at Iowa is laughably wrong.
Click to expand...
Show me from 1960 to 2000 how recruiting rankings correlated to wins or loses. There weren't any. Your post has nothing to do with anything, I was just trying to explain REALITY to you. You didn't answer nary a one of my questions (which I knew you wouldn't) because you cling to a 'belief', practice confirmation bias, and aren't interested in trying understand anything.
So because Evans was recently dropped to a 2 star, he is now a worse player? We should've cut him loose as soon as his rating changed? Is our new QB recruit a 4 star or a 3 star? Would he play better for us if all the services agreed he's a 4 star? You guys just DON'T GET IT!
Getting the best players you can to fit your system and then develop and execute a plan correlates to more wins, not some stupid rating system that means nothing except to a bunch of arm chair QB's. How did Ohio St. get good players before any of these services existed? If your 'theory' is correct on 'stars', then Texas, Tennessee, USC, etc.. should win every game they play and be competing for championships every year. But they're not. Why? You cannot look at a recruiting classes 'rating' and make any kind of educated guess on how many wins and losses said class will have in their 4 or 5 years on campus. It doesn't work that way. And some teams are going to get 'better' recruits no matter what anyone 'rates' them or if there are any rating services or not. Get it. That's how it worked for ever BEFORE rating services and nothing has really changed.
 
cmhawks99 said:
Please stop saying a handful, it used to be you guys would say I'm tired of hearing about Bob Sanders and Robert Gallery, etc.... well hear about this, 25+, that is not a handul ...25+ in the NFL is in fact a ton. Saying a handful is disingenuous and self-serving.

Also there is a correlation to wins, there is also a correlation to "not winning" Texas, A&M, ND, Florida, etc, etc, etc....how many etcs do you want?!

Every year some of these recruiting juggernauts are up & many are down....that also is a fact.

So recruiting "rankings" likely isn't the real key.
Click to expand...

Reading comprehension is your friend- I never mentioned NFL draft picks.
 
From 2010 until 2014. Fairly pointless to go to 2015 and up. Iowa signed 27 2-star kids.13 have started multiple years and counting Hesse, Jewel, Jackson and Wadley it looks to me like 5 are in the NFL and/or have serious shots. That's doesn't count multiple others that got serious looks in NFL camps. That's a pretty good ROI.

I will say once again, I do not think signing 10 plus a year is a good recipe, but the 5ish or less we've been signing works well for us.
 
IAHawk2011 said:
Reading comprehension is your friend- I never mentioned NFL draft picks.
Click to expand...


Nice try....you guys like to try to "shame" people with misdirection...I SAID NFL....you said a handful, meaning "good" by any measurement...I used the ultimate measuring stick by saying 25 plus have played in the NFL...cognitive thinking skills also can be your friend. Anything else....didn't think so. Bad misdirection attempt by the way...
 
cmhawks99 said:
Nice try....you guys like to try to "shame" people with misdirection...I SAID NFL....you said a handful, meaning "good" by any measurement...I used the ultimate measuring stick by saying 25 plus have played in the NFL...cognitive thinking skills also can be your friend. Anything else....didn't think so. Bad misdirection attempt by the way...
Click to expand...

Im not misdirecting anything. I am trying to have a conversation here, and you and Muskie both keep responding with misrepresentations of what I post, or a response that literally has nothing to do with it. It’s tiring.
 
IAHawk2011 said:
Im not misdirecting anything. I am trying to have a conversation here, and you and Muskie both keep responding with misrepresentations of what I post, or a response that literally has nothing to do with it. It’s tiring.
Click to expand...

I absolutely did not misrepresent anything....You said only a handful turn out & I clearly showed you, that was inaccurate.
 
cmhawks99 said:
I absolutely did not misrepresent anything....You said only a handful turn out & I clearly showed you, that was inaccurate.
Click to expand...

I guess I should add, as it pertains to Iowa. By percentage nationwide they do not, of that we'd agreed.
 
Terry Roberts is rated 2 Star and I just have a feeling he will be reranked 4 or 5 Star when all said and done....just got that Phil Parker magic feeling about him
Also saw Samson Evans is 2 Star and he dominated on the field....he has all the intangibles these services overlook. Some players just know how to play real football and simply don’t impress with combine #’s- they may not be impressive running in socks and underwear but put some pads on and these guys can ball out-once football is play d without pads I’ll start worrying about Iowa’s recruiting
 
Muskie5 said:
If the coaches who are recruiting and evaluating talent don't look at 'stars' and have no idea what 'stars' any particular kid has, then how do they matter? They matter to YOU, they don't matter to most coaches. That is a fact, look it up. There are hundreds of coaches out there who are better evaluators of talent than these 'scouts' and writers for these rating sites. These rating sites were started for and exist for one purpose and one purpose only; TO MAKE MONEY..... off over-zealous fans and athletes families who pony up hoping a 'star' will get their kid some advantage. It doesn't.
KF, like many other coaches, doesn't know how many 'stars' a kid has nor does he care. And if he would happen to care about 'stars', which rating service should he 'believe', since they disagree quite often. Have fun with your little 'star' beliefs, but try not get too worked up about it. It's not that important to anyone except over-zealous fans and these sites who 'created' an industry to make money. Period. Here's a little article about the recruiting process...show me where 'stars' come in. http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...-how-college-football-coaches-recruit-players
Click to expand...
when looking at players drafted in the NFL its dominated by 4-5 star rated guys coming out of HS so at least in that regard the Yahoo's who couldn't coach get that aspect correct pretty consistent.
 
Dick Rambone said:
when looking at players drafted in the NFL its dominated by 4-5 star rated guys coming out of HS so at least in that regard the Yahoo's who couldn't coach get that aspect correct pretty consistent.
Click to expand...
That’s misleading to an email extent- a higher percentage of 4-5 stars are drafted overall yes, however, there are much fewer of them in general and there are many more 3* or less in the NFL because college rosters are made up of 80-90% of them. Furthermore schools like Iowa and Wisconsin put 3* or less players into the NFL at a much higher rate then other schools. Stars matter but at the same time they do not and especially at a school like iowa
 
Recruiting services don't take into account whether a kid is a mental flake, cancerous teammate or can even read a kids book and spell their own names, Iowa does that and it disqualifies some recruits.
 
Dick Rambone said:
when looking at players drafted in the NFL its dominated by 4-5 star rated guys coming out of HS so at least in that regard the Yahoo's who couldn't coach get that aspect correct pretty consistent.
Click to expand...

By percentages yes, by total no... there are still way more three stars taken than anything else.
 
Muskie5 said:
And those same teams that get the best recruits every year have been getting the best recruits for 50 years regardless who the coaches are. Coaches that go to these blue blood schools aren't necessarily better 'recruiters' than KF, it's an institutional thing. Some of you just don't get 'it' and apparently never will. You have 'beliefs' and no amount of evidence can overcome that. Conventional beliefs and counterintuitive realities are dangerous banes for this country.
Click to expand...
Oh, ok. So we just give up trying to recruit the best players. Right. That should work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

H

Recruiting Players: 8 Years of Rankings (2 Years Prior to Clark, The 4 Clark Years & 2 Years After Clark)

Replies
13
Views
6K
Iowa Women's Basketball
Grumpy Old Hawk
Grumpy Old Hawk
Blair Sanderson

New Story PFF Deep Dive: Nebraska & Iowa

Replies
9
Views
3K
The Press Box
skiebel_a_hotmail.com
S
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back