QMany Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 If we are losing targets in Omaha because other schools are "showing the most interest," maybe the recruiting "effort" talk needs to be tempered just a little. 2 Quote Link to comment
knapplc Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 I would imagine, if he were "a target," we'd have shown more than a passing interest in him. This staff has shown they'll put the full court press on a kid they really want. They didn't do that with this kid. Ergo, they didn't really want him. We can't just randomly sign everyone in a 500-mile radius. We have to have a need they can fill. Stockpiling bodies isn't a sound recruiting strategy. 1 Quote Link to comment
StPaulHusker Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 If we are losing targets in Omaha because other schools are "showing the most interest," maybe the recruiting "effort" talk needs to be tempered just a little. Well at least the effort is there to offer in state kids. How many good ones did the last 2 coaches not offer just to see them go other places and succeed? Quote Link to comment
The Dude Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 If we are losing targets in Omaha because other schools are "showing the most interest," maybe the recruiting "effort" talk needs to be tempered just a little. How much effort do you expect for guys they don't have a ton of interest in landing? Quote Link to comment
QMany Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Now we didn't want him? How the narrative changes ... 2 Quote Link to comment
ADS Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 So he's committing to Iowa as a spot saver and if anyone else comes along that is seemingly better than them he could reopen things? Okay not too hurt that he isn't coming here then. Quote Link to comment
The Dude Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Now we didn't want him? How the narrative changes ...Probably as a defensive end. Which he didn't want to play. This isn't a recent development. 1 Quote Link to comment
Omaha-Husker Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 SSO over on Huskermax is pretty tied to the program and Omaha. He says we weren't showing a ton of interest, way less then iowa, and the both parties drifted apart. Also says it's not over and Fant is basically re-opening the recruitment after his season. Imo, more it's a spot saving spot. But I still don't think he ever ends up here. Got a text this morning that said something similar. Nebraska wasn't showing as much interest as Iowa and that Fant hasn't responded to a number of recent contacts by the coaching staff. Quote Link to comment
BIG ERN Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 I believe the staff already felt in a good spot for TE with Snyder and Stoll. Also still a chance on Moss Quote Link to comment
StPaulHusker Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Now we didn't want him? How the narrative changes ... I think the narrative was that perhaps this coaching staff wasn't interested in him playing TE. Right, wrong, or indifferent, Iowa wants him as a TE only and that's what he wanted. Quote Link to comment
QMany Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Pushing back his decision again. Now says by the end of summer. Worked exclusively at TE during the 7-on-7 state tournament but says he doesn't have a preference as to which side of the ball to play on in college. Maybe I'm just way too paranoid but it seems like an odd coincidence that on the day Fant announces he's made his decision, we offer another TE. Perhaps we still want Fant at DE - although we told him he could play either - but..... Did this change drastically recently? Quote Link to comment
Mavric Posted August 28, 2015 Author Share Posted August 28, 2015 I would imagine, if he were "a target," we'd have shown more than a passing interest in him. This staff has shown they'll put the full court press on a kid they really want. They didn't do that with this kid. Ergo, they didn't really want him. We can't just randomly sign everyone in a 500-mile radius. We have to have a need they can fill. Stockpiling bodies isn't a sound recruiting strategy. He's the highest ranked player in the state where the coaches have said they want to do a better job recruiting. He would currently be the seventh-highest rated prospect in our class. He can play either of two positions that the coaches have bemoaned our lack of depth. And particularly at DE we don't seem to have any other prospects even that interested at this point. Either we have a few guys we really like that no one knows about or we should absolutely have been doing everything we can to get him. I don't think your last paragraph is applicable in the slightest. 4 Quote Link to comment
StPaulHusker Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Pushing back his decision again. Now says by the end of summer. Worked exclusively at TE during the 7-on-7 state tournament but says he doesn't have a preference as to which side of the ball to play on in college. Maybe I'm just way too paranoid but it seems like an odd coincidence that on the day Fant announces he's made his decision, we offer another TE. Perhaps we still want Fant at DE - although we told him he could play either - but..... Did this change drastically recently? Maybe. Things happen. Quote Link to comment
Treand3 Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Happy for him and his family. Quote Link to comment
knapplc Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 I would imagine, if he were "a target," we'd have shown more than a passing interest in him. This staff has shown they'll put the full court press on a kid they really want. They didn't do that with this kid. Ergo, they didn't really want him. We can't just randomly sign everyone in a 500-mile radius. We have to have a need they can fill. Stockpiling bodies isn't a sound recruiting strategy. He's the highest ranked player in the state where the coaches have said they want to do a better job recruiting. He would currently be the seventh-highest rated prospect in our class. He can play either of two positions that the coaches have bemoaned our lack of depth. And particularly at DE we don't seem to have any other prospects even that interested at this point. Either we have a few guys we really like that no one knows about or we should absolutely have been doing everything we can to get him. I don't think your last paragraph is applicable in the slightest. Does the guy even want to play DE? If we have two TE in the class and are on the trail of #3, does it make sense to bring in another guy at that position? Maybe he just didn't click with the coaches. Maybe the coaches didn't click with him. Who knows? I'm just not seeing an end-of-the-world scenario because this guy didn't commit here. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.