Yup. The only way Kohl gets immediate playing time is if he drops down a level. Then he could showcase himself for a year and then possibly transfer to a P4 school for a starting spot.
Transfer Portal Tracker
- Thread starter CoachHines3
- Start date
With the 4 stars not always pane
We've seen that with Scates, Gaines, Deyo.
IIRC there was an article several years ago that some of the "expert recruiting" never actually saw the players before assigning their "stars".
+1
We've seen that with Scates, Gaines, Deyo.
IIRC there was an article several years ago that some of the "expert recruiting" never actually saw the players before assigning their "stars".
I know you can go down and not wait, but can you then go back up without waiting?
Yep. I agree with a lot of what you wrote. And you’re right, if he just wants to play (or at least a clearer path to playing) then he should transfer down a level and get immediate playing time.
You’re right. The scenario I laid out will happen every year. And the advantage he has transferring right now is 4 years of eligibility. That is definitely a feather in the cap. But he’d still have 3 years of eligibility next year too.
There’s also 1 disadvantage: inexperience. You say that he’ll have more recent game tape now (with garbage time and high school the prior year) than he will next year. But who knows what could happen next year. Rocco could get hurt, or underperform, or Kohl just beats him out. He would be the clear #2 here in those cases and would get more game experience, if he needed to transfer in the future.
If he transfers this year, I expect he’ll have very few P4 suitors that will offer a better path to playing time than ISU. If he gets some real college game tape next year (if Rocco gets hurt, etc) he can sell himself a lot more. Otherwise he could just transfer down a level, which is basically the same situation he’s in now.
1)Temper tantrum? You mean a senior, who lost his senior night game and had passion and frustration? Yeah. Never in a million years am I going to rip someone for having emotion.
2) Also, when we out gain on the ground what we did in the air, I probably would refrain "we threw all over them" because while passing game was certainly good the ground game was, uhm, better, so , just maybe not the game to say we "threw" all over them. I know stats and details might not matter much but you know... little things. They did out gain us in the air as well. So again, Rocco had a great game but not the game to say we threw all over them when we also attempted 12 passes. None of that takes away from a great performance just saying, I'd probably word it myself differently based on the stats and facts of the game but that's just me.
Unless every time a QB slams a helmet, a tablet or whatever, that's all tempertantrums then I'll take tempertantrums.
2) Oh, wait, I was answering a question? And in said, question, there was no clarifications. Next time someone asks a question, I'll make sure to reask them, do you mean of the quarterbacks that we could only get to come back to Iowa State? Or the quarterbacks we played... my fault. I was answering a question without clarifying which quarterbacks were and were not allowed to be part of the answer. I'll try to do better in the future.
3) There's a lot of RB's I'd take over Sama. Gordon obviously would be one. Because while I'm an Iowa State fan, I at least, can appreciate that other schools have talented players who are as good or - gasp- better .
4) So you're definition of rookie might need to be adjusted because A) its his 2nd year B) whether they play or not its college, there's no redshirt so they're still not classified as a "rookie". And C) he played a reasonable amount in his actual rookie year. Its his first year as a first time starter, yes. Rookie, no. And MVP race? Well, not according to Vegas. Which can obviously change, he's having a great year, undoubtedly. But not considered in the current MVP race at the moment by most.
Last edited:
Dekkers getting caught up in the gambling situation really hurt JJ from a timing stand point. With Dekkers as a starter, JJ could have learned for two years and then competed for the starting job as a RS Sophomore. Dekkers losing is eligibility hurt because if forced that competition to happen when JJ was just a true freshman. This put him at an disadvantage. Now that Rocco won the job and has had significant on field success, the gap between the two increased. I'm glad things played out the way they did, because Rocco was a huge upgrade over Dekkers but the timing wasn't the best for JJ.
IDK. Yes, it'd be a gamble so would waiting a year to see what happens.
Its not a great analogy but if I'm in love with a girl, have 4 years left of my life and she's with someone else, do I spend another year trying to convince her I'm the better bet, or do I try to move on and try to find someone whose willing to give me an opportunity? Its a tough choice and question and a tough one to answer.
If he wanted to leave, his best bet would be reaching out to the other schools who offered him, first. See if there was any interest. After that... yeah it might be a G5 situation. But with the current rules, he could always transfer from there again at a later point. IE Gabriel.
I 99.9% agree with you. The only thing is - they're both 1 year apart. At that position, where only one guy can realistically play much... that's tough. Even at Georgia, Carson Beck waited but he's got I think,2 , maybe 3 years of elgibility after Bennett. He's a junior but IDK if he's got a quote un quote covid year or if he'd be able to get a grad year etc.
You wouldn’t take the highest rated recruit in the history of football over Rocco? I really like Rocco too, but think I’m taking Arch every single time
Im not convinced Dekkers would have started the whole year. I think it is likely Becht overtook him at some point.
It is hard for a starting QB to be over taken by a backup with no playing experience, but it is very likely Dekkers would have played his way onto the bench based on what we saw the year before. It worked out well for Iowa State that Dekkers lost his eligibility, because I have a feeling the staff would have shown him more loyalty than he deserved. We are 100% better with Rocco as our QB.
I'm not so sure it would have been Becht simply over-taking him so much as Dekkers playing the same way he did towards the end of last season and everyone, fans, media, etc. pressuring for a change to be made. I always said Dekkers would have never finished this season as the starting QB anyway. The gambling probe just sped up the transition (for the better).
100% agree or at least, at many schools. Some schools will make that change like Miami did before the Florida State and then injury forced them to go back etc...
and that's my main reason I think JJ might leave sooner rather than later. We are in a very very good spot with Rocco and its highly likely he'll end up on the bench. Which is good for us, not as good for JJ, in terms of PT, so that's why it would not surprise me in the slightest
Legit think we sped up the rebuild by a full year. especially with getting a bowl game and extra practices? maybe a year and a half. staff showed no hesitation to play true freshman, because what did they have to lose?
I would take a QB with a full seasons worth of proof that he can be a good QB (Rocco) over a kid who has yet to play a college game; yes.
Arch is the highest rated recruit ever because of his last name. He's also likely good, but not good enough to even be 2nd string this year at Texas.