Recruiting Rankings

[Eternal Return]

I posted this near the end of another (long) thread, but I don't want this to get lost. I'm curious why some posters have been excited about the last couple of years of recruiting. Not saying you're wrong to be excited, necessarily, but the recruiting rankings don't seem to suggest Iowa will necessarily improve much if at all. Are some of you suggesting that the coaches are doing a better job finding players who fit the schemes Iowa runs? If that's the case you may be right, but so far there's little evidence that is true. Yes, we'll find out one way or the other in the next 2 years.

But just looking at the B10 recruiting rankings from 2013 to 2017 (to include fifth year seniors), these are Iowa's results:

RIVALS (1st # is overall rank/2nd # is ranking by points averages)
2013: 8th/9th
2014: 11th/9th
2015: 13th/10th
2016: 8th/8th
2017: 8th/8th

247 Sports (B10 rankings; all rankings are points-based)
2013: 12th
2014: 12th
2015: 12th
2016: 9th
2017: 8th

So the recruiting the past two years is marginally better, but there isn't a single class ranked in the top half of the B10. ESPN team rankings require payment so screw that.

So based on these rankings why suspect Iowa to climb to the upper echelon of the B10?

First let's look at the 2011 and 2012 rankings that led the 2015 squad to 12-2:

Rivals (B10)
2011: 4th/7th
2012: 6th/6th

247 (B10)
2011: 3rd
2012: 7th

Both of those classes were ranked in the top half of the B10 by both sites. The 2011 class (fifth year seniors in 2015) was particularly strong. Based on that, what makes anyone think that the recruiting is better? I mean, yes, it's better than 2013 to 2015, but just barely. I don't see the reason to think Iowa will improve significantly unless it's because the coaching improves.

Plus, Iowa's 2018 class is currently ranked 13th (247) and 12th overall/9th points-based (Rivals) in B10. Tell me what I'm not seeing in the rankings and why 247 and Rivals are wrong about Iowa's recruiting the past couple years and this year?

 

[Wasnt-drunk-didnt-troll]

In an effort to blame urban meyer I'm going to say that our recruiting has gone up and so has everyone else's. Because f ohio state. That being said our recruitting needs to continue to improve alot. The only thing i am thinking is they want to take a small class they feel really good aboit and try to make next years large after they have more of a product to sell.

 

[nu2u]

Take a look at 3 recruits from the 2013 class who will be playing their final home game this Saturday.

2013
Josey Jewell, Rivals Rating 5.3, 2-stars, other offers: UNI
Matt Vandeberg, Rivals Rating 5.4, 2-stars, no other offers
Akrum Wadley, Rivals Rating 5.2, 2-stars, other offers: Temple
2017
Josey Jewell - currently 5th all-time Iowa career tackles
Matt Vandeberg - currently10th all-time Iowa career receptions
Akrum Wadley - currently 9th al-time Iowa career rushing yards

Jewell and Wadley are likely to finish top 5 at their position and VandeBerg needs 6 more catches to pass Ed Hinkel on the career pass reception list.

Of the 22 recruits signed in 2013, most of the players (12) did not make it to Senior Day. They are:
Jonathan Parker
Reggie Spearman
Anjeus Jones
Sokomon Warfield
Andre Harris
Derrick Mitchell
Malik Rucker
Nic Shimonek
John Kenny
Brant Gressell
Colin Goebel
Derrick Willies
All but 2 of these departed 2013 recruits were Rivals Rated 3-stars - rated higher than Jewell, Wadley, and MVB who ended up as major contributors.

Its only a snapshot of one recruiting class and this particular class was not highly ranked but it demonstrates that player ratings, while useful, are at best highly unpredictable projections of how they will impact the future success of the program.

IMO player ratings (and by extension class rankings) developed by the commercial recruiting services are a good place to start when assessing the potential strength of a recruiting class but they are mostly useless in determining the degree that class ultimately contributes to the success of the program. There are just too many variables and contingencies which render them unreliable. Therefore, I don't place great reliance on them. I agree, a higher ranked class indicates a greater potential but that potential needs to make it onto the field and prove their value.

Its also important to remember that the profile of a prospect developed by the Iowa staff is more comprehensive and includes information and research not necessarily developed by the commercial services. If a coach likes a certain prospect they don't give a shit about his Rivals rating. There are also certain rating biases presented by Rivals and others IMO. To base an argument solely on the ranking of Rivals, or Scout, or any other commercial service is suspect to begin with.

 

[OutbackBowl2017]

It tells me Iowa coaches aren't very good at recruiting top level players or mid level players for that matter with their evaluation process if that many leave and then sign fall back recruits that just happen to pan out.

This coaching staff has everything they need to be successful at bringing in high level talent - brand new state of the art facilities, large recruiting budget, great fan support in a continuously updated Kinnick stadium. What do they do? Recruit marginal players and rely on walk ons so we can hear Kirk's feel good stories after they can't sell the high level players to play at Iowa. It appears they don't have any closers on the staff.

Kirk has been a good coach but he needs to step up his game in the recruiting spectrum. If you can't get a verbal after the massive tOSU blow out win, something is terribly wrong with their recruiting process.

 

[UncleChesterton]

Recruiting is a black art in which success on the field parallels success in the living room- to an extent- and the two feed each other in a cycle. Wondering why KF isn't reeling in 4 and 5 star recruits because we have the nicest Taco Bells in the state and a great set of selector dumbells in the weight room is silly.

 

[curtfry]

It tells me Iowa coaches aren't very good at recruiting top level players or mid level players for that matter with their evaluation process if that many leave and then sign fall back recruits that just happen to pan out.

This coaching staff has everything they need to be successful at bringing in high level talent - brand new state of the art facilities, large recruiting budget, great fan support in a continuously updated Kinnick stadium. What do they do? Recruit marginal players and rely on walk ons so we can hear Kirk's feel good stories after they can't sell the high level players to play at Iowa. It appears they don't have any closers on the staff.

Kirk has been a good coach but he needs to step up his game in the recruiting spectrum. If you can't get a verbal after the massive tOSU blow out win, something is terribly wrong with their recruiting process.

https://n.rivals.com/news/rivals-top-50-recruiting-teams-of-the-past-five-years

Hope that link works. I think we could get to 35-40 range, but considering Wisconsin is at 40 with all their recent success shows how hard recruiting is to schools like Iowa and Wisconsin.

 

[iowa surfer]

I posted this near the end of another (long) thread, but I don't want this to get lost. I'm curious why some posters have been excited about the last couple of years of recruiting. Not saying you're wrong to be excited, necessarily, but the recruiting rankings don't seem to suggest Iowa will necessarily improve much if at all. Are some of you suggesting that the coaches are doing a better job finding players who fit the schemes Iowa runs? If that's the case you may be right, but so far there's little evidence that is true. Yes, we'll find out one way or the other in the next 2 years.

But just looking at the B10 recruiting rankings from 2013 to 2017 (to include fifth year seniors), these are Iowa's results:

RIVALS (1st # is overall rank/2nd # is ranking by points averages)
2013: 8th/9th
2014: 11th/9th
2015: 13th/10th
2016: 8th/8th
2017: 8th/8th

247 Sports (B10 rankings; all rankings are points-based)
2013: 12th
2014: 12th
2015: 12th
2016: 9th
2017: 8th

So the recruiting the past two years is marginally better, but there isn't a single class ranked in the top half of the B10. ESPN team rankings require payment so screw that.

So based on these rankings why suspect Iowa to climb to the upper echelon of the B10?

First let's look at the 2011 and 2012 rankings that led the 2015 squad to 12-2:

Rivals (B10)
2011: 4th/7th
2012: 6th/6th

247 (B10)
2011: 3rd
2012: 7th

Both of those classes were ranked in the top half of the B10 by both sites. The 2011 class (fifth year seniors in 2015) was particularly strong. Based on that, what makes anyone think that the recruiting is better? I mean, yes, it's better than 2013 to 2015, but just barely. I don't see the reason to think Iowa will improve significantly unless it's because the coaching improves.

Plus, Iowa's 2018 class is currently ranked 13th (247) and 12th overall/9th points-based (Rivals) in B10. Tell me what I'm not seeing in the rankings and why 247 and Rivals are wrong about Iowa's recruiting the past couple years and this year?

Smoke and Mirrors huh? Proof in Pudding is in the eating no ? Silver TALKER a modest HOPE huh?

 

[nu2u]

It tells me Iowa coaches aren't very good at recruiting top level players or mid level players for that matter with their evaluation process if that many leave and then sign fall back recruits that just happen to pan out.

Your right. Attrition is valid criticism, your point is well taken. While every program experiences attrition, Iowa seems to lose players at a higher rate than other programs. That will obviously effect the quality of depth which, over time, makes the team less competitive relative to other teams.

Iowa proudly holds itself out as a "developmental" program - the bulk of the so-called Rivals 3-star 18 year olds arriving each year will be developed into higher 3-star or 4-star type contributors at 20/21 years old (Wadley, e.g.). When a majority leave within 3 years, you have lost a lot of your initial recruiting investment which, in turn, places a premium on success in subsequent recruiting classes. A continuous ripple effect. Its been a real problem under Ferentz IMO.

 

[cocoem]

It tells me Iowa coaches aren't very good at recruiting top level players or mid level players for that matter with their evaluation process if that many leave and then sign fall back recruits that just happen to pan out.

This coaching staff has everything they need to be successful at bringing in high level talent - brand new state of the art facilities, large recruiting budget, great fan support in a continuously updated Kinnick stadium. What do they do? Recruit marginal players and rely on walk ons so we can hear Kirk's feel good stories after they can't sell the high level players to play at Iowa. It appears they don't have any closers on the staff.

Kirk has been a good coach but he needs to step up his game in the recruiting spectrum. If you can't get a verbal after the massive tOSU blow out win, something is terribly wrong with their recruiting process.

You need to educate yourself in the recruiting end of things. Seems easy right? Iowa is not even close to the top tier bunch of schools when it comes to the recruiting world....never has been. Plus other than the Top 30 kids in the country according to the "star guys" it is a total crap shoot. Gives fan bases something else to bitch about but it is the most inexact sports science out there. Big, big, big business behind the scenes.

 

[cecilB]

Peeps, you can really stop reading this thread after reading this guy’s post. If you still want to take the click bait, and believe what it sells, well go for it....and sound just like a Nebraska fan...they love the *rankings

I posted this near the end of another (long) thread, but I don't want this to get lost. I'm curious why some posters have been excited about the last couple of years of recruiting. Not saying you're wrong to be excited, necessarily, but the recruiting rankings don't seem to suggest Iowa will necessarily improve much if at all. Are some of you suggesting that the coaches are doing a better job finding players who fit the schemes Iowa runs? If that's the case you may be right, but so far there's little evidence that is true. Yes, we'll find out one way or the other in the next 2 years.

But just looking at the B10 recruiting rankings from 2013 to 2017 (to include fifth year seniors), these are Iowa's results:

RIVALS (1st # is overall rank/2nd # is ranking by points averages)
2013: 8th/9th
2014: 11th/9th
2015: 13th/10th
2016: 8th/8th
2017: 8th/8th

247 Sports (B10 rankings; all rankings are points-based)
2013: 12th
2014: 12th
2015: 12th
2016: 9th
2017: 8th

So the recruiting the past two years is marginally better, but there isn't a single class ranked in the top half of the B10. ESPN team rankings require payment so screw that.

So based on these rankings why suspect Iowa to climb to the upper echelon of the B10?

First let's look at the 2011 and 2012 rankings that led the 2015 squad to 12-2:

Rivals (B10)
2011: 4th/7th
2012: 6th/6th

247 (B10)
2011: 3rd
2012: 7th

Both of those classes were ranked in the top half of the B10 by both sites. The 2011 class (fifth year seniors in 2015) was particularly strong. Based on that, what makes anyone think that the recruiting is better? I mean, yes, it's better than 2013 to 2015, but just barely. I don't see the reason to think Iowa will improve significantly unless it's because the coaching improves.

Plus, Iowa's 2018 class is currently ranked 13th (247) and 12th overall/9th points-based (Rivals) in B10. Tell me what I'm not seeing in the rankings and why 247 and Rivals are wrong about Iowa's recruiting the past couple years and this year?

 

[OutbackBowl2017]

You need to educate yourself in the recruiting end of things. Seems easy right? Iowa is not even close to the top tier bunch of schools when it comes to the recruiting world....never has been. Plus other than the Top 30 kids in the country according to the "star guys" it is a total crap shoot. Gives fan bases something else to bitch about but it is the most inexact sports science out there. Big, big, big business behind the scenes.

So that explains why Iowa is close to dead last every year in recruit rankings in the B1G and in the 40 to 60 range nationally. Sorry, I don't buy it.

 

[Eternal Return]

I'm watching Van Ginkel tearing it up for Wisconsin right now. Wasn't he one of the guys Iowa wanted most last year? Can't blame him for going to Wisconsin because he looks like a 3-4 linebacker more than a 4-3 guy.

 

[Eternal Return]

Smoke and Mirrors huh? Proof in Pudding is in the eating no ? Silver TALKER a modest HOPE huh?

Smoke and mirrors? Respond to the wrong post, maybe?

 

[Eternal Return]

Peeps, you can really stop reading this thread after reading this guy’s post. If you still want to take the click bait, and believe what it sells, well go for it....and sound just like a Nebraska fan...they love the *rankings

What would you have me do? I decided to look at the rankings after looking at the post about Iowa's offense rankings and defense rankings under Ferentz. I figured opinions were no longer accepted so I thought maybe some statistical analysis would be useful to understand what has gone wrong for Iowa. But, yeah, it's only another set of statistics. But add them all up from numerous threads about different subjects, different areas, and the picture of what is going on and perhaps why seems worthwhile. If you're not into it then don't post. Instead, you have to disparage my post? Maybe if you didn't lump all posters who try take a critical look at how and why Iowa is doing what it has been doing you'd recognize the difference between a negative post and an inquisitive post that displays some facts that are not as pleasant as any of us would like. I think there only four posters on this board who are even-keeled in recognizing that there are both positives and negatives about the team and can be honest with themselves and others without getting butthurt by someone pointing out either the positive or negative. Put a pillow under your butt the rest of the day. It'll help with the healing.

 

[biggreydogs]

Take a look at 3 recruits from the 2013 class who will be playing their final home game this Saturday.

2013
Josey Jewell, Rivals Rating 5.3, 2-stars, other offers: UNI
Matt Vandeberg, Rivals Rating 5.4, 2-stars, no other offers
Akrum Wadley, Rivals Rating 5.2, 2-stars, other offers: Temple
2017
Josey Jewell - currently 5th all-time Iowa career tackles
Matt Vandeberg - currently10th all-time Iowa career receptions
Akrum Wadley - currently 9th al-time Iowa career rushing yards

Jewell and Wadley are likely to finish top 5 at their position and VandeBerg needs 6 more catches to pass Ed Hinkel on the career pass reception list.

Of the 22 recruits signed in 2013, most of the players (12) did not make it to Senior Day. They are:
Jonathan Parker
Reggie Spearman
Anjeus Jones
Sokomon Warfield
Andre Harris
Derrick Mitchell
Malik Rucker
Nic Shimonek
John Kenny
Brant Gressell
Colin Goebel
Derrick Willies
All but 2 of these departed 2013 recruits were Rivals Rated 3-stars - rated higher than Jewell, Wadley, and MVB who ended up as major contributors.

Its only a snapshot of one recruiting class and this particular class was not highly ranked but it demonstrates that player ratings, while useful, are at best highly unpredictable projections of how they will impact the future success of the program.

IMO player ratings (and by extension class rankings) developed by the commercial recruiting services are a good place to start when assessing the potential strength of a recruiting class but they are mostly useless in determining the degree that class ultimately contributes to the success of the program. There are just too many variables and contingencies which render them unreliable. Therefore, I don't place great reliance on them. I agree, a higher ranked class indicates a greater potential but that potential needs to make it onto the field and prove their value.

Its also important to remember that the profile of a prospect developed by the Iowa staff is more comprehensive and includes information and research not necessarily developed by the commercial services. If a coach likes a certain prospect they don't give a shit about his Rivals rating. There are also certain rating biases presented by Rivals and others IMO. To base an argument solely on the ranking of Rivals, or Scout, or any other commercial service is suspect to begin with.

How many big ten rings?