Iowa sucks.....who can we......oh

I would love to have,

Delano Hill Rivals 4 star

Ht 6 foot

Wt 198

40. 4.44

John Wisnieski Rivals 3 star

Ht 6'5

Wt 215

40 4.8

Colin Goebel Rivals 3 star

Ht 6'4

Wt 275

40 5.0

Malik Rucker Rivals 3 star

Ht 6 foot

Wt 175

40 4.48

These would all be needs in our current class and currently are as good as we would get.

PS Gotta love Ruckers hair

 
Wisnieski would be N if the staff hadn't slow played him. As it is, I think the staff is happy with the HS player currently verballed and a JUCO TE. If the staff swings and misses on the JUCO, I don't think they take another HS TE.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wisnieski would be N if the staff hadn't slow played him. As it is, I think the staff is happy with the HS player currently verballed and a JUCO TE. If the staff swings and misses on the JUCO, I don't think they take another HS TE.
With the current state of Iowa football, do you think Wisnieski could be an option if, god forbid, Sandland doesn't pick NU?

 
Hedley Lamarr said:
I would love to have,

Delano Hill Rivals 4 star

Ht 6 foot

Wt 198

40. 4.44

John Wisnieski Rivals 3 star

Ht 6'5

Wt 215

40 4.8

Colin Goebel Rivals 3 star

Ht 6'4

Wt 275

40 5.0

Malik Rucker Rivals 3 star

Ht 6 foot

Wt 175

40 4.48

These would all be needs in our current class and currently are as good as we would get.

PS Gotta love Ruckers hair
We rejected Wisnieski's commitment, FYI source

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wisnieski would be N if the staff hadn't slow played him. As it is, I think the staff is happy with the HS player currently verballed and a JUCO TE. If the staff swings and misses on the JUCO, I don't think they take another HS TE.
We will probably take Casey Sayles reguardless.

 
Hedley Lamarr said:
I would love to have,

Delano Hill Rivals 4 star

Ht 6 foot

Wt 198

40. 4.44

John Wisnieski Rivals 3 star

Ht 6'5

Wt 215

40 4.8

Colin Goebel Rivals 3 star

Ht 6'4

Wt 275

40 5.0

Malik Rucker Rivals 3 star

Ht 6 foot

Wt 175

40 4.48

These would all be needs in our current class and currently are as good as we would get.

PS Gotta love Ruckers hair
We rejected Wisnieski's commitment, FYI source
I am going to disagree....RSS is full of poo and rose colored glasses. Never get the full picture just the parts that make NU look good. The kid is a solid TE that needs a college weightroom. IMO he and Hart would be a good combo.

I am having less and less faith in the Sandland fiasco. You wanna talk about a hold off on being N look no further.

 
Hedley Lamarr said:
I would love to have,Delano Hill Rivals 4 star

Ht 6 foot

Wt 198

40. 4.44

John Wisnieski Rivals 3 star

Ht 6'5

Wt 215

40 4.8

Colin Goebel Rivals 3 star

Ht 6'4

Wt 275

40 5.0

Malik Rucker Rivals 3 star

Ht 6 foot

Wt 175

40 4.48

These would all be needs in our current class and currently are as good as we would get.

PS Gotta love Ruckers hair
Disagree with you saying they are as good as we would get.

 
What other safety targets are on our radar? I have heard of some dang good CB prospects but not much on the Safety slots. In terms of another TE not named Sandland I think Wisnieski is about as good as we have left on the board. Goebel like you already said would be a nice addition to a depthless OL

 
What other safety targets are on our radar? I have heard of some dang good CB prospects but not much on the Safety slots. In terms of another TE not named Sandland I think Wisnieski is about as good as we have left on the board. Goebel like you already said would be a nice addition to a depthless OL
Boaz is a safety target as well as a cb. Boaz is head and shoulders the better athlete. Really like the mean streak and the athleticism of Boaz. He Is very raw yet, but we can afford to take a kid like that with our depth in the secondary. It doesn't appear we have another TE target and it appears the staff is content with that.

 
Back
Top