For those worried about recruiting stars....

**SpokaneCY** · 12-09-2012, 04:50 PM

Originally Posted by ISUCubswin

Serious question, would he have played much this year if he came here? Rhoads said it was clear Richardson was a better passer than the other two, but didn't play due to lack of experience. So I don't think we would've seen him until next year.

Serious question - did we make his top 20?

**ISU42** · 12-09-2012, 04:52 PM

I think what's funny is that Mack Brown has offered the last two Heisman winning quarterbacks as defensive backs.

**jdoggivjc** · 12-09-2012, 04:55 PM

Originally Posted by ISU42

I think what's funny is that Mack Brown has offered the last two Heisman winning quarterbacks as defensive backs.

What's even funnier is how bad Texas has been at QB the last several years and how they've offered the last two Heisman QBs as DBs.

**ISUCubswin** · 12-09-2012, 05:01 PM

Originally Posted by SpokaneCY

Serious question - did we make his top 20?

I'm guessing since we were 1 of 4 BCS schools to offer him...yes?

**Tre4ISU** · 12-09-2012, 05:07 PM

Originally Posted by cyrocksmypants

System quarterback. He's going to get crushed by defenses next season. They'll be able to gameplan against him better now. Write it down, they'll regret giving him the Heisman because of how bad he's going to look next year.

Yeah, because every team figures out every successful QB after one year.

**kilroy** · 12-09-2012, 05:14 PM

Originally Posted by Rhoadhoused

This has been said literally (the real use of the word, not exaggerating) 100 times on this site. Somebody cherry picks a guy who over performed.....

Iowa State would have more wins if it recruited more highly ranked recruits, of that I am pretty sure. Where were you talking people down about the Lazard commit? His stars don't matter....

really, really? Did you forget this not TX? Oh course people are going to point these cases out! That's why we are a blue collar team and guys like these give us hope. And literally I really could care less if you try to grammar police this place to death or not, its a freaking football forum. You're lucky people use periods.

Also brilliant piece of work, more talent equals more wins, like, WOW genius.

I just thought that the raining heisman trophy winner deserved a point of emphasis on stars point.

**xboxfever** · 12-09-2012, 05:49 PM

Originally Posted by Clones21

My goodness...... I think I just pooped me self.

What's it like having no friends? It has to be a lonely, lonely world.

**thatguy** · 12-09-2012, 06:51 PM

this is cute and all, but lets not forget that he is being protected by a bunch of five star highly recruited offensive lineman.
Stars and ratings matter, because talent matters.

**Prone2Clone** · 12-09-2012, 06:54 PM

Pull his Heisman! 4-star minimum requirement.

**GMackey32** · 12-09-2012, 06:54 PM

He was a 5.7 3 star. 5.8 is a 4 star. Let's not make it seem like he was a low 3 star/high 2 star.

**Rabbuk** · 12-09-2012, 07:00 PM

I got zero stars coming out of high school but I perform damn well in intramural softball. Your move rivals.

**SpokaneCY** · 12-09-2012, 07:05 PM

Originally Posted by Rabbuk

I got zero stars coming out of high school but I perform damn well in intramural softball. Your move rivals.

I call BS... EVERYONE gets at least 2 stars on the final Rivals rankings. YOUR move intramural softball liar!

**FanatiClone** · 12-09-2012, 07:17 PM

Originally Posted by Rhoadhoused

This has been said literally (the real use of the word, not exaggerating) 100 times on this site. Somebody cherry picks a guy who over performed, and says that it in some way invalidates recruiting rankings.

Over time statistics bear out that the best teams are ranked the highest in recruiting. That does not mean a lower ranked player has no chance to be good. That does not mean there are no busts. It is easy to cherry pick after the fact, but it doesn't make a sound argument.

Iowa State would have more wins if it recruited more highly ranked recruits, of that I am pretty sure. Where were you talking people down about the Lazard commit? His stars don't matter....

Iowa State does recruit highly ranked players....most just choose not to come here, save a few in state guys who's family blood lines run thick with Cardinal and Gold. I'm sure this is quite clear to many of the insightful people on this forum but it seems to me that there is an equal amount of people with very clouded vision which I'll just label as, unsight. What I mean by that is that some posters say the absolute obvious....something along the lines of, "if we just recruited higher ranked players, we'd win more games". Sound familiar? That is a brilliant observation and theory! One I'd personally buy for a buck. What's not as obvious though is that ISU is going to have to inch its way there through the cycle of..... wins = high rated recruits = more wins = higher rated recruits = even more wins = highest rated recruits, etc. This, I believe, is a fact. I do believe the process has more than just begun though. Rhoads is certainly going in the right direction and has been since his arrival. Success has to come first, before the higher rated recruits even look in ISU's direction...not the other way around. Its doable though. One has to look no further than K State, OK State, TCU or Boise State to see evidence of this. These are all programs that had to start with 2 and 3 star talent. All these programs had coaches that could spot the talent level of under rated recruits. Rhoads is doing the same thing IMO.

**Luth4Cy** · 12-09-2012, 08:45 PM

I think we would be better if he played here. I don't think we would be incredible though. Quite frankly he has a supporting cast that we don't offer and he has an offensive genius as a head coach.

**Rhoadhoused** · 12-09-2012, 08:48 PM

Originally Posted by FanatiClone

Iowa State does recruit highly ranked players....most just choose not to come here, save a few in state guys who's family blood lines run thick with Cardinal and Gold. I'm sure this is quite clear to many of the insightful people on this forum but it seems to me that there is an equal amount of people with very clouded vision which I'll just label as, unsight. What I mean by that is that some posters say the absolute obvious....something along the lines of, "if we just recruited higher ranked players, we'd win more games". Sound familiar? That is a brilliant observation and theory! One I'd personally buy for a buck. What's not as obvious though is that ISU is going to have to inch its way there through the cycle of..... wins = high rated recruits = more wins = higher rated recruits = even more wins = highest rated recruits, etc. This, I believe, is a fact. I do believe the process has more than just begun though. Rhoads is certainly going in the right direction and has been since his arrival. Success has to come first, before the higher rated recruits even look in ISU's direction...not the other way around. Its doable though. One has to look no further than K State, OK State, TCU or Boise State to see evidence of this. These are all programs that had to start with 2 and 3 star talent. All these programs had coaches that could spot the talent level of under rated recruits. Rhoads is doing the same thing IMO.

I agree with absolutely everything you say. (Although I meant if ISU signed higher rated recruits, obviously we do recruit highly ranked players). I have no issues with the staff or their strategies in recruiting. The only thing I want is to see steady improvement in recruiting as ISU accomplishes more on the field and as facilities get better. Obviously they have done that now as this past month may be the best recruiting month in ISU history.

My issue is with people cherrypicking low rated players and using it as justification to say the rankings are worth nothing. They are worth something. Every time a recruit who is a 5.5 or lower commits, there is a overwhelming response of people making fun of the stars and rankings and posting Jake Knott's rivals profile to justify the signing. Then when Campos and Lazard commit the stars are all anyone can talk about. I support CPR and co in every recruit they sign, I would just like to see them keep improving and getting guys other schools want as well as the unheralded guys that they believe in and want to develop. You need both of those to compete for championships.

My issue is also with people bring it up over and over and over. It happens in every single thread about a recruit committing. Every person who criticizes the star system thinks they are some knight in shining armor who is coming up with some extremely original and helpful thought. Well, it has been said 100 times and most people understand it already. You don't have to be highly rated to be good.

It's like telling an NFL team not to spend a first round draft pick on a QB because the Patriots got Tom Brady in the 7th round. Sure the underdog wins and if your staff can pick out gems it is great and almost essential to winning, but you still need to be able to get that highly rated talent every once in a while.