Encouraging note on IU recruiting class

[mushroomgod_1]

Per a thread on another site, Final 247 player rankings had Devon Matthews, Jaylin Williams, and Taylor listed as 4* & #s 219, 313, and 353 players nationally, with Walker as a 3* rated #453.

Someone on here had commented that Matthews was a huge steal, and apparently that was accurate. He went up something like 500 spots in the final rankings. All 3 of the other players mentioned also went up in the final rankings.

 

[Sope Creek]

Per a thread on another site, Final 247 player rankings had Devon Matthews, Jaylin Williams, and Taylor listed as 4* & #s 219, 313, and 353 players nationally, with Walker as a 3* rated #453.

Someone on here had commented that Matthews was a huge steal, and apparently that was accurate. He went up something like 500 spots in the final rankings. All 3 of the other players mentioned also went up in the final rankings.

So we have some additional evidence that CTA and his staff are good talent evaluators independent of the ratings agencies. That's a good thing. And it helps to have this capacity so we can get onto kids who other staffs might overlook, establish relationships with those kids and get a leg up on closing the recruitment deal. In CTA We Trust.

The downside to these jumps is that other staffs might be looking at IU's recruitment lists more closely, see potential where they otherwise might've missed it, and start on our potential recruits earlier than they otherwise might have done.

The key then will be how solidly CTA and the staff are able to establish and develop relationships with the kids they want . . . and on this point I think the evidence is also pointing to In CTA We Trust.

It also points to how important the December signing period is going to be for programs like IU, where good coaching staffs develop solid relationships with kids who would get poached by major programs in January.

So far all this is a net-net positive for IU having CTA and his staff in place.

Soooo . . . ICTAWT.

 

[Baller23Boogie]

Per a thread on another site, Final 247 player rankings had Devon Matthews, Jaylin Williams, and Taylor listed as 4* & #s 219, 313, and 353 players nationally, with Walker as a 3* rated #453.

Someone on here had commented that Matthews was a huge steal, and apparently that was accurate. He went up something like 500 spots in the final rankings. All 3 of the other players mentioned also went up in the final rankings.

Taylor is still a three star.

 

[Sassy61]

Taylor is still a three star.

On the football field, I believe he will perform like a 5 star.

 

[mobilehoosier]

We need performance on field. If we get performance we’ll get recruits we want. Master of the obvious. Huge grin! Go Hoosiers!

 

[Hoosier_Hack]

Thank goodness for early signing.... it really benefits the evaluators

 

[IndyIUFan66]

Don't forget Act 2: I believe we will get 2-4 more good recruits on Feb signing day too!

 

[Blue Water Hoosier]

Taylor is still a three star.

Look at his offers

 

[YOTHN]

Taylor is still a three star.

But #1 in our hearts..... vbg

 

[Chriselli]

Thank goodness for early signing.... it really benefits the evaluators

Unfortunately, it won't matter when kids are able to transfer freely without penalty and Alabama can recruit our sophomore gems. There will be constant speculation the way there is now about turning pro. Sad.

 

[mk23]

Unfortunately, it won't matter when kids are able to transfer freely without penalty and Alabama can recruit our sophomore gems. There will be constant speculation the way there is now about turning pro. Sad.

I missed something. Is this currently the case? Open transfers?

 

[76-1]

I missed something. Is this currently the case? Open transfers?

NCAA brought it up at their meeting and it's assumed that it will go into effect next year... That's my recollection only though...

Oddly enough I couldn't find a link for an article about the topic even though I thought I read a couple last week...

 

[mk23]

NCAA brought it up at their meeting and it's assumed that it will go into effect next year... That's my recollection only though...

Oddly enough I couldn't find a link for an article about the topic even though I thought I read a couple last week...

Man. that will suck. Programs like IU seem to have to overcome so damn many obstacles (and yes, a lot are self-inflicted) that it's just hard to "break thru" with any kind of consistency. I thought the early signing period was absolutely perfect for IU, but if the geniuses at the NCAA allow open transfers on a willy-nilly basis, that'll set us back far more than the original Feb signing date ever did.

 

[hoosier roadtrips]

In the old days players transferred because they were not receiving enough playing time, and therefore they either chose a lower level program in D1 or went to D2 so they could play. Now (at least in basketball) players leave a program because they are stars at a smaller program and they feel they can show their skills at a higher level. It must be tough to be a coach at a smaller school and fear losing their stars all the time.

There also can't be incentive to redshirt a player unless he is injured for the entire season. The player will just leave if he has graduated and still has eligibility remaining. The Ivy League schools, for example, have to lose players who have graduated and still have another season remaining, because they don't allow players to stay for a fifth year. Henry Caruso went to Santa Clara to finish up because he couldn't stay at Princeton after being injured early last season. He averaged 15 points and 6.2 rebounds as a junior and was All-Ivy League.

 

[Indianaftw]

Man. that will suck. Programs like IU seem to have to overcome so damn many obstacles (and yes, a lot are self-inflicted) that it's just hard to "break thru" with any kind of consistency. I thought the early signing period was absolutely perfect for IU, but if the geniuses at the NCAA allow open transfers on a willy-nilly basis, that'll set us back far more than the original Feb signing date ever did.

Its not just IU though...It could be a fiasco for everyone. Although the AD has to give the student permission to transfer they can deny the request under the current system. There should be a new set of guidelines or reason as to why the student wants to transfer.

 

[76-1]

Man. that will suck. Programs like IU seem to have to overcome so damn many obstacles (and yes, a lot are self-inflicted) that it's just hard to "break thru" with any kind of consistency. I thought the early signing period was absolutely perfect for IU, but if the geniuses at the NCAA allow open transfers on a willy-nilly basis, that'll set us back far more than the original Feb signing date ever did.

It's a great deal if you're a consistent top 15 team... Not so great for everyone else trying to reach that level...

 

[mk23]

Can't really imagine having to "recruit" your existing players 24/7/365 to keep the big boys from plucking your stars. Hard to believe the NCAA would allow this to take place.

 

[Superstar84b]

I don’t think that it matters. If your program is a hell hole, then players should transfer. If your program has any legitimacy, they won’t want to transfer. I think that there should be no roster limits, you should be able to cut players and there should be no transfer limits. If Indiana losses guys, they better get better at football. It’s that simple. This can actually be a wake up call to schools and force them to build solid teams, only select players who love the programs, and actually address issues so that guys don’t leave. This could actually boost competitiveness because it gives programs and incentive to do more. It’s not about recruiting your guys 24/7, it’s more so about you better run solid programs that are trying to win now. Purdue under Hazel is an example of a circus that would’ve ended much sooner with these rules.

 

[Indianaftw]

I don’t think that it matters. If your program is a hell hole, then players should transfer. If your program has any legitimacy, they won’t want to transfer. I think that there should be no roster limits, you should be able to cut players and there should be no transfer limits. If Indiana losses guys, they better get better at football. It’s that simple. This can actually be a wake up call to schools and force them to build solid teams, only select players who love the programs, and actually address issues so that guys don’t leave. This could actually boost competitiveness because it gives programs and incentive to do more. It’s not about recruiting your guys 24/7, it’s more so about you better run solid programs that are trying to win now. Purdue under Hazel is an example of a circus that would’ve ended much sooner with these rules.

Disagree here...this will create a circus. There is more parity now than ever. 30-40 years ago Nebraska and Oklahoma used line up in the wishbone and beat teams by 70 on a regular basis. That doesn't happen any more. There need to be specifics on player transfers.

Pretty soon a league like this might be where everyone goes and what everyone watches. This started out as a bigger idea but it sounds like they are going smaller and building it. https://www.usatoday.com/story/spor...-developmental-college-ed-mccaffrey/96416744/

 

[hoosier roadtrips]

That would be a terrible idea to have no scholarship limits. The top programs would just stockpile extra players just so competitors can't have them The limits have helped competitive balance. Compare the number of good programs now to what it was 40 years ago. Then it was ND, USC, Michigan, Ohio State, Oklahoma, Nebraska and Texas for the most part. And ND will have every player, since its fans/broadcasters claim that "everyone" wants to play there!

 

[76-1]

That would be a terrible idea to have no scholarship limits. The top programs would just stockpile extra players just so competitors can't have them The limits have helped competitive balance. Compare the number of good programs now to what it was 40 years ago. Then it was ND, USC, Michigan, Ohio State, Oklahoma, Nebraska and Texas for the most part. And ND will have every player, since its fans/broadcasters claim that "everyone" wants to play there!

Parity has arrived to a large degree but I would still like to see the NCAA bump the max number up, at minimum to 90, at maximum (and my preference) 100...

With those extra 15 scholarships you could add 8 to build real depth and keep 7 to reward Walk-Ons who have worked their behind off to earn one...(in fact, the NCAA could designate that type of 8-7 distribution by rule).