ISU #1 Returning Production In Nation

[BWRhasnoAC]

I know PFF's credibility is rather sketchy anymore, but this doesn't look bad:

Green is our highest rated receiver? That's crazy.

 

[SolarGarlic]

Green is our highest rated receiver? That's crazy.

Not really. He played at a lower level.

 

[BWRhasnoAC]

Not really. He played at a lower level.

Still D1. It's just a reflection of their prior year I understand it's not a guarantee but I didn't think he was such a high performer.

 

[SolarGarlic]

Still D1. It's just a reflection of their prior year I understand it's not a guarantee but I didn't think he was such a high performer.

Lol ok...it's still a significantly lower level. It should stand to reason that he would perform well against that level, which is why he's transferring up. It's definitely not "crazy".

 

[SolarGarlic]

Here's my point how much does Michigan have returning? Who has a better shot at the playoffs?

Is anyone saying that ISU's returning production is an indicator that we're a playoff team?

Take it for what it's worth. We had a surprisingly solid year last year, and we're returning almost the same exact roster. In a developmental program like ISU, continuity is a huge factor in success and more relevant than in plug and play programs. It's a good sign for us, and Connelly pointed out that the top 4 teams in returning production last season were Kansas, Missouri, Florida State, and Michigan. They went from 35-18 to 48-7, so there might be something to being at the highest end of this metric.

Nobody is saying this means we're going undefeated. It's just a piece of data that's undoubtedly a huge positive given all the context.

 

[BWRhasnoAC]

Lol ok...it's still a significantly lower level. It should stand to reason that he would perform well against that level, which is why he's transferring up. It's definitely not "crazy".

Lol as you say Supreme Arbiter of Words.

 

[RagingCloner]

I know PFF's credibility is rather sketchy anymore, but this doesn't look bad:

5 years ago if you would have told me ISU's and KU's receivers would make up 50% of this list, i dont think i would have believed you

 

[alexssdean12]

I just went back and looked at every final playoff rankings. Each year besides 2 the Big 12 would have had 2. Many future Big 12 teams also sprinkled in that would offset the loss of OuT.

2014: 5) Baylor 6) TCU
2015: 4) Oklahoma 11) TCU
2016: 7) Oklahoma 12) Oklahoma State
2017: 2) Oklahoma
2018: 4) Oklahoma
2019: 4) Oklahoma 7) Baylor
2020: 6) Oklahoma 10) Iowa State
2021: 7) Baylor 9) Oklahoma Stste
2022: 3) TCU 9) Kansas State
2023: 3) Texas 12) Oklahoma

Future Big 12
2014: 10) Arizona
2016: 10) Colorado
2017: 12) UCF
2018: 8) UCF
2019: 11) Utah
2020: 8) Cincinnati
2021: 4) Cincinnati 11) Utah
2022: 8) Utah

Do you think there is any chance we could get four like in 2021? I just don't see that happening

 

[ClubCy]

5 years ago if you would have told me ISU's and KU's receivers would make up 50% of this list, i dont think i would have believed you

Correct because Oklahoma and Texas probably would have had 4-5 on that list.

 

[Cyforce]

Is anyone saying that ISU's returning production is an indicator that we're a playoff team?

Take it for what it's worth. We had a surprisingly solid year last year, and we're returning almost the same exact roster. In a developmental program like ISU, continuity is a huge factor in success and more relevant than in plug and play programs. It's a good sign for us, and Connelly pointed out that the top 4 teams in returning production last season were Kansas, Missouri, Florida State, and Michigan. They went from 35-18 to 48-7, so there might be something to being at the highest end of this metric.

Nobody is saying this means we're going undefeated. It's just a piece of data that's undoubtedly a huge positive given all the context.

Nice overreaction.

 

[Cyforce]

Correct because Oklahoma and Texas probably would have had 4-5 on that list.

End of the year probably, returning usually not.

 

[MeanDean]

I think that most years both CCG participants for the Big 12 are getting in especially if they both have 2 losses or less. A 3 loss team might be iffy but could still get in dependent on other conferences.

I hope you're right, but with the loss of our 2 blue bloods there will be continuous discounting of the strength of schedule component.

 

[BoomerClone]

I hope you're right, but with the loss of our 2 blue bloods there will be continuous discounting of the strength of schedule component.

One of those blue bloods would have made the 12 team CFP the same number of times ISU did the last 10 years.

 

[MeanDean]

One of those blue bloods would have made the 12 team CFP the same number of times ISU did the last 10 years.

But they have the most money and loudest cadre of ball-washers (including media) in all of CFB.

Which will be directed to build up the SEC instead of the B12

 

[BWRhasnoAC]

But they have the most money and loudest cadre of ball-washers (including media) in all of CFB.

Which will be directed to build up the SEC instead of the B12

How do I get my own ball washers? That sounds nice.

 

[Cyforce]

Correct because Oklahoma and Texas probably would have had 4-5 on that list.

So where would OuT returnees rank on that list. You said they'd have 4 or 5 on that list.

 

[SolarGarlic]

Nice overreaction.

Overreaction to what? It's a message board. I added my thoughts.

 

[SolarGarlic]

Lol as you say Supreme Arbiter of Words.

It's so crazy that a receiver at a lower level has that high of rating on PFF. CRAZY.

 

[BWRhasnoAC]

It's so crazy that a receiver at a lower level has that high of rating on PFF. CRAZY.

You're very mature, I can tell.

 

[Cyforce]

Overreaction to what? It's a message board. I added my thoughts.

Is anyone else saying...