Talk of talent and recruiting

[temperflare]

CPR is trying to put talent on the field and trying to develop that talent out of necessity, more so than convenience. This always results in struggles! But it is invaluable experience that WILL pay off later (think Nigel Tribune isn't going to be great in a year or two?). I think it's best to look at this year as an investment year to build experience and depth. I believe it will pay off, but I also believe that it's obvious our offensive woes are a result of coaching. The lack of consistency is the glaring result of a coach or coaches that do not communicate well either amongst themselves and/or with the players. That needs to change and I expect it will in the off-season.

 

[isu81]

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

I understood what you were trying to get to. I just wondered why you would go to such work to come up with a different way to look at it than just accepting already established team rankings, whether they be Rivals, 247 or the guy down the street. If this makes you feel better, please carry on.

What 4 teams were we ahead of in 2013?

 

[brett108]

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.

Other than an anomolous loss to WVU, OSU would be the top rated team in the Big 12. They will beat UT, because they have a defense, and UT will give up points. UT will finish 3rd, which is where they have been lately.

 

[drednot57]

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.

One needs patience. If thing don't improve next year, then let's talk of replacing CPR. In the meantime, this post makes you look like a common troll.

 

[isu81]

Other than an anomolous loss to WVU, OSU would be the top rated team in the Big 12. They will beat UT, because they have a defense, and UT will give up points. UT will finish 3rd, which is where they have been lately.

Brett-I can honestly say I've never seen the word anomalous on a message board. Now I've seen two posts where you used it. Nice work...

 

[IAStubborn]

I understood what you were trying to get to. I just wondered why you would go to such work to come up with a different way to look at it than just accepting already established team rankings, whether they be Rivals, 247 or the guy down the street. If this makes you feel better, please carry on.

What 4 teams were we ahead of in 2013?

Because the recruits were clearly getting better but it wasnt reflective in the rankings and people like you were using this as evidence that our recruits weren't getting better, when they have. Which is all I said. Lots of different ways to show recruiting success. None are perfect.

 

[IAStubborn]

1. Texas 3.67*
2. OU 3.38*
3. OSU 3.08*
4. Baylor 3.04*
5.Tech 2.96*
6.ISU 2.92* (if you count montgomery we are at 2.96)
7.TCU 2.91*
8. WVU 2.81*
9. KSU 2.79*
10. KU 2.17*

/QUOTE]

 

[Doc]

So everyone is drinking the "We have young talent, and these recruiting classes are awesome"

Does anyone not realize that we have almost been dead last in recruiting in the big 12 the last 3 years?

2011: 9th (2.65 star average)
2012: 10th (2.76 star average)
2013: 9th (2.5 star average)
*Notable: we have one 4 star commit in 2013 in Lazard, thats it.

Dig further, Kansas state has been about the same in their recruiting right near the bottom with us and Kansas. However, K-state was one game away from a national title last year and was solid the previous 2 years. So really, can we blame it on recruiting alone?

I blame coaching. K-State developed their players, we don't. Have we had any players really improve that greatly during 4 years outside of Knott and Klein? Iowa State is a good place to go if you want your QB dreams to die instantly or be a mediocre RB behind a crap offense.

Defense was salty, credit Burnam and Rhoads defensive backgrounds. However, offense has shown ZERO improvement. This has been discussed I know but quit using the we are just young right now and recruiting is improving. Its not improving were still dead last almost every year. If you expect us to get above 3 wins in conference with dead last recruiting classes and poor coaching we won't.

Sorry to crap in everyone cheerios but its time to be realistic. The problem isn't recruiting alone or being young, its that we have an incompetent coaching staff. The upset wins are flukes, not a indication of great coaching. Play Nebraska at Nebraska 10 times and we lose 9 of them, play OSU 10 times and I bet they whip us 7-8 times. Just saying, I'm slowly losing faith in this staff. Offseason will be huge. I will continue to donate and go to games but if we don't win 6-8 games next year, the money I spend on football will be going straight to the basketball program. /Rant

If your money is actually a big deal, you should probably send this to Pollard, rather than rant on CF.

K-State is just not a good comparison for judging our coaching staff. They were fortunate with Snyder. We could fire a coach every 3 years for the next 50 years and not find another Snyder.

Many of the same people who had the sanity to not hype recruits and "development" to absurd levels are the same people who are not losing hope in this coaching staff.

You did a good job off keeping your title real general so people wouldn't be able to dig up this post in a year or two.

 

[FanatiClone]

Other than an anomolous loss to WVU, OSU would be the top rated team in the Big 12. They will beat UT, because they have a defense, and UT will give up points. UT will finish 3rd, which is where they have been lately.

Like I said, I'd be willing to wager on that. We'll just keep it simple. If I'm wrong I'll certainly eat crow and give you your props for being right. UT over OSU. You heard it here.

 

[brett108]

Like I said, I'd be willing to wager on that. We'll just keep it simple. If I'm wrong I'll certainly eat crow and give you your props for being right. UT over OSU. You heard it here.

Fair enough. Here is the kicker for me. Gundy>>Brown. In the end it matters.

 

[FanatiClone]

Fair enough. Here is the kicker for me. Gundy>>Brown. In the end it matters.

Agree wholeheartedly. I'd take Gundy over Brown, at this point, in a heart beat. But, 4-5* guys>>2-3-4* guys. Texas is starting to gel a bit and utilize the talent that they have. OSU is too unsettled at QB to move the ball and put it in the EZ against the talent UT has, even if that talent hasn't exactly been cohesive for much of the season.

 

[rholtgraves]

Because the recruits were clearly getting better but it wasnt reflective in the rankings and people like you were using this as evidence that our recruits weren't getting better, when they have. Which is all I said. Lots of different ways to show recruiting success. None are perfect.

How are they clearly getting better but it's not reflected in the rankings. That makes no sense whatsoever.

When every way of measuring the classes but one that you came up with shows ISU 9th in recruiting don't you think maybe that your analysis is flawed. The problem is that you took a composit three star as being the same as another composite three star on 247. That's not the case. Each player is given a star rating but they are also rated numerically. An 89 ranked three star is not the same as an 80 ranked three star for example. ESPN does a similar thing by the way.
So on 247 they don't use an avg star ranking because it doesn't show the difference between the players they show an avg numerical ranking. Now Scout and Rivals do things differently. The use avg star ranking plus a point system. They have ISU 9th by these measures.

Rivals for 2013 9th with 2.56 star avg and 1245 points

Scout for 2013 9th with 2.4 star avg and 1451 points

247 for 2013 9th with .8220 avg rating

ESPN for 2013 9th couldn't find any other data. But the avg rating was 74.29 and I didn't count the one player who wasn't evaluated. I think the avg star was about 3 without the one guy not evaluated. ESPN basically had the last four big 12 teams as really close in ranking.

It's really not a surprise that when a team recruits at level that is at the bottom of the big 12 that is where they will find themselves in the big 12 standings. Coaching can only do so much. There is a reason people think Rhoads is a good coach for getting Iowa State to 6 wins and it's because the talent is lower than that. If ISU wants to compete in the top half of the Big 12 then it has to recruit in the top half. They will never be on the level of Texas or Oklahoma but they need to improve recruiting. I'm not saying there isn't some talent. Clearly guys like Bundrage and Bibbs an Wimberly have talent. The just need more talent especially on the lines.

 

[Wesley]

Brett-I can honestly say I've never seen the word anomalous on a message board. Now I've seen two posts where you used it. Nice work...

You only joined in 2013....you are a newbie to this site

 

[isu81]

You only joined in 2013....you are a newbie to this site

Ha ha. OK, I'll continue to watch for it.

 

[Yellow Snow]

How are they clearly getting better but it's not reflected in the rankings. That makes no sense whatsoever.

When every way of measuring the classes but one that you came up with shows ISU 9th in recruiting don't you think maybe that your analysis is flawed. The problem is that you took a composit three star as being the same as another composite three star on 247. That's not the case. Each player is given a star rating but they are also rated numerically. An 89 ranked three star is not the same as an 80 ranked three star for example. ESPN does a similar thing by the way.
So on 247 they don't use an avg star ranking because it doesn't show the difference between the players they show an avg numerical ranking. Now Scout and Rivals do things differently. The use avg star ranking plus a point system. They have ISU 9th by these measures.

Rivals for 2013 9th with 2.56 star avg and 1245 points

Scout for 2013 9th with 2.4 star avg and 1451 points

247 for 2013 9th with .8220 avg rating

ESPN for 2013 9th couldn't find any other data. But the avg rating was 74.29 and I didn't count the one player who wasn't evaluated. I think the avg star was about 3 without the one guy not evaluated. ESPN basically had the last four big 12 teams as really close in ranking.

It's really not a surprise that when a team recruits at level that is at the bottom of the big 12 that is where they will find themselves in the big 12 standings. Coaching can only do so much. There is a reason people think Rhoads is a good coach for getting Iowa State to 6 wins and it's because the talent is lower than that. If ISU wants to compete in the top half of the Big 12 then it has to recruit in the top half. They will never be on the level of Texas or Oklahoma but they need to improve recruiting. I'm not saying there isn't some talent. Clearly guys like Bundrage and Bibbs an Wimberly have talent. The just need more talent especially on the lines.

It is in fact possible to have improved recruiting and NOT pass anybody in the rankings. He's not saying we are passing people up on the recruiting trail, he is saying that relative to ourselves in the past we are closing the GAP between us and them.

We have a long way to go, but I do believe that the caliber of player we are getting now is CLOSER to our competition than it ever has been. Hence, recruiting and talent are on the upswing.