To be fair, that really hasn't changed either. I think the recent financials that were posted will quite things down some but douche bags like Paul Finebaum just can't help themselves.
Is recruiting that much better?
- Thread starter clonedude
- Start date
To be fair, that really hasn't changed either. I think the recent financials that were posted will quite things down some but douche bags like Paul Finebaum just can't help themselves.
Would bet CMC has not lost a recruit because we lost to UNI. Can't prove it obviously...
This pretty much sums up what I was trying to say in my original post.
I don't really care if our classes are ranked 5 places better than Rhoads', or 5 places worse, etc. I just want to see evidence that when this staff sees a kid play in person and talks with them, and then lands them, that they end up being the real deal and can contribute.
What is on paper (stars) doesn't really matter to me. Success will be determined on whether the kids you get are able to contribute at a high level, and stay at ISU all 4 or 5 years IMO. Landing a 4 star that ends up being no good, hurts you. Landing a 2 star that ends up playing like a 4 star means your coaching staff has a great eye for talent.
IMO, CMC is off to a really good start at showing he has a great eye for talent. A lot of the true freshman played last year, and contributed in a positive way. So that is a good sign.
He lost to UNI and still brought in the best recruiting class in school history with that. Recruiting didn't stumble after eight months.
This thread may be much shorter if this were the original post. Less entertaining though, so there's that.
Those uncertainties for recruits are still there. While it may not be unstable, the media is fueling this every year. We kept hearing in the past year about how OU might want out.
Statistically speaking, you're talking about landing 4-6 4-star players every year. That would make you a perennial top 15-ish class most years. There are programs with significantly more historical success and significantly better recruiting grounds that don't do that.
Campbell's success is going to be predicated upon better evaluating the 3-star guys and doing a better job of developing them.
I think it's silly to think that ISU is going to out-recruit the blue blood programs of college football.
Recruiting rankings are not meaningless at all but IMO having a system in place to develop middle to high 3 stars can lead to a damn good football team. Snyder and Mr Excitement over in Iowa City have been doing this for years. Staff continuity is crucial, which is why Iowa State is going to have to open the checkbook for CMC and his staff as soon as they field a bowl eligible team. If CMC can create a program that can develop players they will sprinkle in some 4 star kids in most classes.
For me, even if the class' ranking ended up being the same as Rhoads', you can tell Campbell and his staff have a plan for each and every recruit. Each recruit fits into their very specific system and there seems to be an over-arching plan in general.
Towards the end of Rhoads' tenure, it seemed like his staff was just taking whoever would come to ISU regardless of how the recruit fit into their system, if there even was a system towards the end. Which explains the couple of classes were we basically landed 0 linemen recruits.
Towards the end of Rhoads' tenure, it seemed like his staff was just taking whoever would come to ISU regardless of how the recruit fit into their system, if there even was a system towards the end. Which explains the couple of classes were we basically landed 0 linemen recruits.
Getting good players and getting them to stay is the key. CPR had a lot of guys that never showed up or left after a year. He also had a rediulous number of linemen have career ending injuries. That is probably bad luck, but man it sucks when half of the projected starters are out before the season starts.
I firmly believe that the number of knee injuries we had on the o-line were directly related to recruiting undersized guys and packing too much weight on them.
I was simply pointing out that for a program with ISU's history and geographical issues....filling a class with 25% with 4-star players is probably an unrealistic goal.
Development is going to have to be their hallmark, not recruiting
You just need to be able to land players like Vance and other under the radar kids like that. I know you're negative but even you have to be pumped about him
He will use his media "power" to boost the SEC. All day, every day.
From many posts it sounds like undersized lineman were brought in as recruits under Rhoades. It is very hard for that type lineman to get the weight and mass size and use it in a violent game without serious injuries. Taller, heavier recruits can add muscle mass and weight needed to withstand the violent position and their body structure can handle it better. Believe me there will be injuries as an olineman. There were surgeries most years on a guy or two from my experience after the end of each season, just not career ending ones that I can remember.
Mostly a lot of ACL's... Carrying the extra weight was a big problem for a lot of those guys.
Recruiting is how big a bucket you have.
Development is how much water you put in the bucket.
We are all very thirsty for wins.
Development is how much water you put in the bucket.
We are all very thirsty for wins.
The Purple Crypt Keeper is successful year after year after year with unheralded recruits. Development > raw talent. Give me a hard worker over a Prima Donna every day. Paul obviously struggled with retention. So the jury is still out on Campbell, IMO. I think this question can only truthfully be answered until after this season.
Makes sense, an extra inch or two of height and a bigger frame coming into college can be very important when a lineman gets in to to 300 to 320+ range.
