Perusing X..

[napali]

This is certainly not an alarmist post, as the world of WBB has changed with the 5 in 5. And it is obvious Iowa will have many players returning next year plus Jada from Wisconsin. However, I did find it interesting that not one update by Talia Goodman included a recruit who was interested or mentioned Iowa. Again, this is not "a sky is falling idea" but places like Michigan, Duke, Notre Dame were mentioned several times, yet in the last five years, Iowa has done better than those programs. Now, LSU, South Carolina, UCONN, UCLA were not mentioned by recruits either. Any thoughts.

 

[Powell living Hawkeye]

I think the conventional wisdom is that (with an added year to play) recruiting is going to become very selective. Teams are also going to have smaller rosters so as to limit transfers out thru the portal. Taken together, these realities should lead to greater parity in talent per school. Coaching quality and staying healthy will be even more important! Go Hawkeyes... Mya get on the train!

 

[Jonesy5960]

I think the conventional wisdom is that (with an added year to play) recruiting is going to become very selective. Teams are also going to have smaller rosters so as to limit transfers out thru the portal. Taken together, these realities should lead to greater parity in talent per school. Coaching quality and staying healthy will be even more important! Go Hawkeyes... Mya get on the train!

Totally agree. The focus for resources was already biased towards roster retention and the portal before the 5 year rule was confirmed. High school recruits were a distant 3rd in that equation and the extension of eligibility only exacerbates that. It's a pretty simple question. Do you want to spend time and money on a highly touted freshman who has to adjust to the college game and might not play extended minutes before transferring out to another school with lots of playing time available, or use those same funds on an existing or portal player who's already producing at a high level and can contribute today? It's a very finite group of freshmen who can come in and be good enough to compete right away for minutes at a high level program Iike Iowa where the roster is loaded with proven players who now have 3-4 years of eligibility remaining.

 

[Kceasthawk@77]

Totally agree. The focus for resources was already biased towards roster retention and the portal before the 5 year rule was confirmed. High school recruits were a distant 3rd in that equation and the extension of eligibility only exacerbates that. It's a pretty simple question. Do you want to spend time and money on a highly touted freshman who has to adjust to the college game and might not play extended minutes before transferring out to another school with lots of playing time available, or use those same funds on an existing or portal player who's already producing at a high level and can contribute today? It's a very finite group of freshmen who can come in and be good enough to compete right away for minutes at a high level program Iike Iowa where the roster is loaded with proven players who now have 3-4 years of eligibility remaining.

Yep. It has to be rough right now on high school players who had hopes of going D1 right from high school. The opportunities are really shrinking the last few years and this one will certainly have an impact on high schoolers.

 

[Conn53victor]

Yep. It has to be rough right now on high school players who had hopes of going D1 right from high school. The opportunities are really shrinking the last few years and this one will certainly have an impact on high schoolers.

So do the high school stars go to second-tier DI schools where they can show their stuff and stuff their stats as freshman to raise their value in the portal?

 

[Kceasthawk@77]

So do the high school stars go to second-tier DI schools where they can show their stuff and stuff their stats as freshman to raise their value in the portal?

Probably or Dll like Stirtz did and hope to show out.