Teams
Forum List
Toggle sidebar

Big recruiting visit weekend

ajk4st8

ajk4st8

Well-Known Member
Mar 27, 2006
16,483
737
113
42
Ankeny
I believe is on Jan 18 and 19th. Glad to see us bringing in guys when we have students on campus and Hilton should be pretty good, especially if we beat Mizzou.

We play Okie St that day.

It would be nice for Chizik and co to wrap up a solid recruiting class that day so we dont have as much last minute scrambles.
 
Hopefully we can wrap things up soon. We have anywhere from 3-6 scholarships to give, as far as we know? The last couple weeks have been strong, hopefully we continue to impress. It would be nice if we had weather like we do this week.
 
I'm guessing that it will be pretty quiet from now until signing day. There is usually a period after all the recruits that are going to commit prior to signing have been identified, and the remainder don't show up until signing. Hope we have two or three real surprises waiting.
 
I don't get much into recruiting but according to rivals.com here is where we stand in star ratings so far:

3 star recruits: 7
2 star recruits: 13
No stars listed: 1

Only 4 are ranked at their positions: Tiller (19) Benton (63) Grant (56) McDonough (47)

I don't put a ton of weight into the star system but I would hope we eventually get a couple 4 star guys in here and not so many 2 stars. Recruiting is a big part of turning this thing around and so far have we really done any better then we did under McCarney in that aspect? Time will tell I guess.
 
travman23 said:
I don't get much into recruiting but according to rivals.com here is where we stand in star ratings so far:

3 star recruits: 7
2 star recruits: 13
No stars listed: 1

Only 4 are ranked at their positions: Tiller (19) Benton (63) Grant (56) McDonough (47)

I don't put a ton of weight into the star system but I would hope we eventually get a couple 4 star guys in here and not so many 2 stars. Recruiting is a big part of turning this thing around and so far have we really done any better then we did under McCarney in that aspect? Time will tell I guess.
Click to expand...

It may not be reflected in average stars, but yes, it's better than McCarney's just in the size and speed aspect alone. Plus you gotta keep in mind that when it comes to Scout the star rating of a player drops the moment they verbally commit to ISU :chatterbox:
 
Anyone know who our 4 star guys in the past were?

I know Austin Flynn, Stevie Hicks, and I think Troy and Darren Davis were all 4 star guys. I know we had a couple that flamed out. I think Walter Nickle was a 4 star guy. Help me out here.
 
last year was j.j. bass, 06 had none, 05 had paul fisher and walter nickel(what happened to paul fisher? twin brother scott was a 3 star that commited to us to-both ol) 04 had webster patrick, 03 had none, 02 had flynn, hicks, curtis james? OL from cali, collin menard OL from iowa, federico samuel DT from cali, and max steward LB from cali. actually 02 looks like a hell of a class on paper:
http://iowastate.rivals.com/commitlist.asp
that was as far back as i could go
 
I guess my thing is if we are talking about competing for Big 12 titles and being a consistent winner I would hope we are in the running for guys that some of the big schools are looking at else we really aren't improving the talent level enough to get to where we want to go. I'm sure we'll uncover some diamonds in the rough but bottom line is why do the best teams in the conference and in the country win consistently? Because they recruit the best talent.
 
No crap. That 2002 class looks great on paper. I think everyone would be thrilled if we could get a class like that again. Except keep it togeather.
 
Ok, here's another thing I just found. Kansas has all 3 star recruits and 1 4 star guy so far. Until this past year they were about as bad as us in recent memory. Even Baylor has a 4 star commit and Colorado has 7! These are the teams we are going up against folks. Just take a look at some of the commits the rest of the Big 12 has right now and most are littered with more 3+ star recruits while we have more 2 star than 3 star guys and not 1 4+ star commit. Other schools in the Big 12 are recruiting size and speed as well...
 
Looking at that class it was definitely a paper tiger - definitely proof of the saying "that's why they don't play games on paper." The only 4-star on that list that actually did anything was Austin Flynn. Face it - Hicks was a flameout and nothing ever came of the other guys. The only other guys that really came out of that class were Jon Davis, Ryan Kock, and Nick Leaders, and they were all 2-stars.

This is why I just don't buy into the "we must get mostly 3 and 4 stars if we ever dream of competing with the big boys." 2002 was evidence that stars are often misleading. I'd rather bring in a bunch of 2 and 3 star guys that are extremely coachable and are the "right" guys instead of a bunch of 3 and 4 star flameouts.
 
jdoggivjc said:
Looking at that class it was definitely a paper tiger - definitely proof of the saying "that's why they don't play games on paper." The only 4-star on that list that actually did anything was Austin Flynn. Face it - Hicks was a flameout and nothing ever came of the other guys. The only other guys that really came out of that class were Jon Davis, Ryan Kock, and Nick Leaders, and they were all 2-stars.

This is why I just don't buy into the "we must get mostly 3 and 4 stars if we ever dream of competing with the big boys." 2002 was evidence that stars are often misleading. I'd rather bring in a bunch of 2 and 3 star guys that are extremely coachable and are the "right" guys instead of a bunch of 3 and 4 star flameouts.
Click to expand...

i am just surprised that mac pulled that type of class. don't remember any hype about it, but didn't follow recruiting then like i do now. even though that class didn't pan out, those kids had to be sought after by a lot of big name schools. don't want to start anything here and i know it's gonna, but i can't help but wonder how much mac and staff is responsible for this class not reaching its potential. maybe a lot of these kids didn't even make it here-i don't remember hearing a lot of those names get called
 
I dont buy into starts too much, but I'd rather have 4/3 star recruits then 2/ and no star recruits. The key is too get players that fit the system you are trying to field. Look at Kansas, they started 2 and 3 star recruits this year and look what it did. Talib was a 2 star and the kid is leaving early.

I know there is a ton of examples of 2 stars that do nothing, but if the kid is an athlete and has football smarts, that is all you need. The proper coaching of techniques will make him a top player along with proper strength and conditioning.
 
jdoggivjc said:
Looking at that class it was definitely a paper tiger - definitely proof of the saying "that's why they don't play games on paper." The only 4-star on that list that actually did anything was Austin Flynn. Face it - Hicks was a flameout and nothing ever came of the other guys. The only other guys that really came out of that class were Jon Davis, Ryan Kock, and Nick Leaders, and they were all 2-stars.

This is why I just don't buy into the "we must get mostly 3 and 4 stars if we ever dream of competing with the big boys." 2002 was evidence that stars are often misleading. I'd rather bring in a bunch of 2 and 3 star guys that are extremely coachable and are the "right" guys instead of a bunch of 3 and 4 star flameouts.
Click to expand...

I completely agree. Players that are coachable can often outplay players that aren't
 
Knownothing said:
No crap. That 2002 class looks great on paper. I think everyone would be thrilled if we could get a class like that again. Except keep it togeather.
Click to expand...

Yep. Looked great on paper. And totally sucked in real life, most of those 4* Jucos were total busts. Leaders and Curvey were great at 2* though.

This class really is ok though.... go back and compare the schools we used to lose recruits to under Mac, we'd always lose several to non-BCS schools. That isn't happening anymore. That also says to me we are recruiting better players who BCS schools want.
 
It wasn't Mac's fault (that they didn't develop, it was his fault for recruiting them), most didn't make it at all, or didn't last through spring ball and summer. I remember that Max Steward, that 4* LB never showed up and basically was AWOL, the coaches had no idea what happened to him, where he went, and couldn't get ahold of him. He just never showed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Help Support Us

Become a patron
Top Bottom
Back