Talk of talent and recruiting
- Thread starter GoSTATE71
- Start date
Risky Signees...Not Really...It reminds me of an article in the KC Star where the Chancellor of KState promised billy bob Snyder that he would see that bill's recruits would stay eligible....this after billy bob Snyder stated that it wouldn't do any good to recruit good or better football players if they just flunked out of school.
This KState turnaround did not just come from the athletic dept and bill snynder It came from the upper administration who got tremendous pressure from the alums and the few donor fans they had when Snyder showed up at manhattan ks.
Go Clones Lets Bury the Mildcats!
I don't know how you did your analysis but it is wrong.
each service uses a different ratings system si it is better to look at them individually an see where ISU is ranked in each One.
A quick glance at the different sites shows ISU either 8, 9, or 10th in the big 12 for several years in a row. And many times they have the lowest avg ranking of recruits.
Taking a look at 2013 and 2014 ISU is ranked 9th in most services but in some instances they have the lowest avg they just have signed more recruits.
Talent defeciency. Fact
What evidence suggests we have talent? Out side of bundrage, I don't see it. Why are you so convinced? Talented teams win more than just once no matter the coaching.
I believe the ratings weight positions (as they should a 5* qb is more important to a class than a 5* star punter). So if you sign a 2* qb it will have more of a negative weight.
I simply averaged each teams composite star ratings of all their signees (per 247). Those are the averages, I am not wrong. We are just talking about different things. Yes there is a talent deficiency but it is improving. That was my point and there is clear evidence of that The ratings are good because they also show us our deficiencies grow when looking at skill positions.
This kind of hits my point. I know I'm not a "meta-analyst", but I do know that if you are ranked 8th, 9th or 10th in every service for several years in a row, you can't average a rank of 6th overall as Stubborn suggests.
You can continue to look at star rankings, but I'm going to go by the eye test. Based on that, I like what I see out of some of our young guys. Especially in the receiving core, I think we have a few real solid recievers and a few game-breakers. The O-line guys are gaining experience and getting better each week. Rogers and Tribune have struggled, but you can see the ability there.
Aside from the Baylor game, I just don't see our guys being physically outmatched like we have seen in some of the worst-of-the-worse years.
Aside from the Baylor game, I just don't see our guys being physically outmatched like we have seen in some of the worst-of-the-worse years.
FIFY. By the way, I do agree at the skill positions. Just think we are light years away on the two lines of scrimmage.
I would add that our linebacker play this year screams of youth and inexperience, and some size problems. We're seeing a lot more 'slip and fall' problems, wide open zones, and arm tackling with our LBs which in an indication of improper positioning and not having enough experience to just play instinctively. Whoever wrote that they saw a lot of thinking going on out there, and once the realization is made, the play is past them is RIGHT. That's inexperience again.
Wow....I quit. It is what I posted. Not average recruiting class ranking. The ranking are not the same as average player rating. I have been transparent with what I posted and I did the same thing for every team for the 2013 class. We had a low 3* qb with only one offer and a composite 2* qb and our two best recruits were oline. I can only assume they use a weighted average by position and we didnt fair as well. Otherwise the rankings don't make sense when looking at it from that perspective. We havent been successful in pulling in a highly touted qb, rb etc. BUT we are clearly improving the overall quality, choose to dismiss.
Last edited:
List of 247 and the composite rating for each isu 2013 signee: http://iowastate.247sports.com/Season/2013-Football/Commits
How composite ratings are done:
247Composite rankings and ratings debut on 247Sports
Iowa State had 73 total composite stars in 2013 and 25 signees. That is an average of 2.92 stars. I did the same process for each team. In 2013 we were #6 using this process.
How is that flawed?
How composite ratings are done:
247Composite rankings and ratings debut on 247Sports
Iowa State had 73 total composite stars in 2013 and 25 signees. That is an average of 2.92 stars. I did the same process for each team. In 2013 we were #6 using this process.
How is that flawed?
Last edited:
Why didn't you just use the site's Big 12 Team Rankings for 2013:
2013 Big 12 Football Recruiting Team Rankings
For those of you still following along, this site ranks us 9th, just like every other site. My gosh, I should have quit when I said I was going to before. I am confident I just got dumber.
I'd be willing to take that wager. Texas will beat OSU. It'll come down to the final game of the season where Baylor will beat UT....but not by as much as you might think. And trust me when I say, I'm certainly no Texas fan.
I had never thought of this. I'm selling my tickets and never going to another game until Rhoads is fired. I'm sure it will be no problem to get a coach who can recruit and develop talent much better than Rhoads. If JP doesn't do this soon, he should be fired too.
laugh:?????
Try "going off" something else. Last Spring, TheCaptain said that there was the most athleticism on the roster, top to bottom that he'd ever seen--and that was before the current freshman class arrived. Someone can link to his comments, I'm sure.
That's good enough for me.
thank you. I have been trying to tell him this but am not sure how I could spell it out....wow
For the 5th time:
COMPOSITE IS NOT SAME AS 247 RANKING... RANKING NOT SAME AS AVERAGE
Fail on 2 counts. The funny thing is you think you are right. Try reading what I have written
