RECRUITING: JUCU TE commits

[Yes13]

Or maybe CPR is making a huge reach in offering this kid. Both opinions are valid at this point, as we won't know whether or not this kid pans out for at least a year, maybe 2.

You could maybe say that about the other two kids (I think you'd be very wrong), but not this kid. He had offers from Arkansas and Texas Tech (yes, real offers, the sites aren't going to put their schools name next to a recruit unless they believe the offer is real).

[CarolinaCy]

But not really because it's June. It's not like he was scrambling to round someone up and just threw it out there. This was a guy they wanted, not needed.

You could maybe say that about the other two kids (I think you'd be very wrong), but not this kid. He had offers from Arkansas and Texas Tech (yes, real offers, the sites aren't going to put their schools name next to a recruit unless they believe the offer is real).

You guys both make good points. I think a lot of people are disappointed when they don't see a long and glorious list of offers next to our commits. I guess I was thinking about the guys we've gotten in the past with impressive offer lists that didn't pan out (Sed Johnson, Bo Williams). Those guys were definitely misses when it comes to recruiting, but you can't say they were reaches.

[WhatchaGonnaDo]

Shocking development:
We're going to have to take unranked 3 star guys and develop them if we want to have success.

[Rabbuk]

Shocking development:
We're going to have to take unranked 3 star guys and develop them if we want to have success.

I'm just going to put my future son in a Rocky 4 strength and development program that Drago uses, and then tell him to go to iowa state. Problem solved.

[WhatchaGonnaDo]

I'm just going to put my future son in a Rocky 4 strength and development program that Drago uses, and then tell him to go to iowa state. Problem solved.

"I must break you."

[cyfan15]

It was something that I have wondered for a while because it seems like there is a little bit of a grey area there for what constitutes an acceptable hard offer. I figured it was an appropriate forum to ask that considering he apparently enrolled or grey-shirted last year at Iowa, and a few Hawkeye posters on here, like myself, haven't heard of the kid before today. Thanks to cyfan for the explanation

No problem. I think the reason Iowa fans haven't heard of him is because he was a late addition (after signing day) on top of being a grayshirt. A few years ago, Earl Brooks signed with ISU long after signing day and it went unnoticed for the most part until the following fall. I think there was a blurb in a local paper about it, but that was it.

With Bibbs also being a grayshirt, he went to Iowa part-time for a semester, but was never officially a member of the football team or on scholarship. As a grayshirt, he would have received a scholarship and joined the team during the spring semester, but for whatever reason he ended up transferring to a junior college before that happened.

[cyfan15]

lol, I chose to ignore this. I follow football recruiting in my free time and I studied ISU, KSU, and KU since I believed we had a better class, and to my discovery we actually do have a better class than both. Rivals points have been set up where you get more points for a commit ranked in state and in the positioning rankings. I found that ISU had more recruits than KU or KSU ranked in both in-state and positional, but for whatever reason we are ranked below them. Therefore I refuse to say KU or KSU had a better class.

ISU-9 state ranked, 6 position ranked
KSU-6 state ranked, 2 position ranked
KU--4 state ranked, 0 position ranked

it'll never make sense to me.

Here is the Rivals recruiting rankings formula. It's from a few years ago, but I don't think they've changed it.

Here is the team ranking formula for those interested... (please keep in mind a statistician from UC-Berkeley developed this for us).

Please note you only take the top 20 prospects in this formula, ordered by # Stars descending.

POINTS = ((N / (N + 50)) * H) + ((50 / (N + 50)) * L)

where...

H = 250 for each 5-star commit + 140 for each 4-star + 75 for each 3-star + 20 for each 2-star + 10 for each 1-star

L = 18 for each 5-star + 12 for each 4-star + 8 for each 3-star + 3 for each 2-star + 1 for each 1-star

N = a big honkin' calculation, described below

CALCULATION OF N:
10 for each commit on the Rivals 100 (high school) ranked 1-10
9 for each commit on the Rivals 100 (high school) ranked 11-20
etc. down to...
1 for each commit on the Rivals 100 (high school) ranked 91-100

10 for each commit on the Rivals 100 (non-high school) ranked 1-10
9 for each commit on the Rivals 100 (non-high school) ranked 11-20
etc. down to...
6 for each commit on the Rivals 100 (non-high school) ranked 41-50

24 for each commit ranked #1 on his official position ranking
18 for each commit ranked #2-5 on his official position ranking
8 for each commit ranked 6-X on his official position ranking, where X is dependent on detail position, as listed below...

--Dual-threat QB: 25
--Pro-style QB: 25
--Running Back: 35
--All-Purpose Back: 15
--Fullback: 15
--Wide Receiver: 50
--Tight End: 20
--Offensive Tackle: 40
--Offensive Guard: 30
--Offensive Center: 10
--Defensive Tackle: 50
--Weakside Defensive End: 20
--Strongside Defensive End: 30
--Inside Linebacker: 35
--Outside Linebacker: 35
--Cornerback: 40
--Safety: 30
--Athlete: 25
--Kicker: (no points awarded for rank lower than 5th)

If the team's average stars are greater than 3, add (100 * (Avg stars -
> 3)) to N. For example, if your class is an average of 3.03 stars, we add 3 to your N.

In other words, simply getting the #1 ranked kicker could artificially inflate a team's ranking.

[cyfan15]

Shocking development:
We're going to have to take unranked 3 star guys and develop them if we want to have success.

Certainly true. I think people also need to remember that a lot of the early commitments we've gotten the last couple years that didn't have many other offers started getting interest from other schools later in the year. Not surprisingly, the commitments we've been getting in December and January have had more offers than the ones we've been getting pre-September/October.

Iowa State is still moving up the recruiting rankings. Rhoads' classes to this point have had more 3* players than Chizik's classes and most of Mac's. Just as importantly, we're doing a better job signing guys that actually make it to school AND keeping them in the program. We actually have a full 85 players on scholarship this year without having to hand out ten scholarships to walk-ons. That means we have more depth, which leads to more wins per year and being able to win more consistently (no more 2003, 2006, etc.).

Winning more consistently and getting some major upsets like we've done creates a winning culture. A winning culture attracts higher caliber recruits, more fans, and therefore more money and a bigger budget. As much as people hate to admit it, Iowa is a pretty good model for this, as is Virginia Tech and several other schools. The next big step is putting more guys in the NFL. Most of Rhoads' recruits are underclassmen, so hopefully we see more of that before too long.

[BallSoHard4Cy]

Junior culleges are great for preparing kids to get to the next level. I wudn't be wurried.

I am also perfect.