Nutrition + Age + Genetics = Deer
Without good nutrition, it don't matter if you have a 5.5 year old buck with the pedigree of a dozen 200"+ bucks and does with fathers that were all 200", a buck will never get big.
Age: a deer spends the first 3 years of its life developing its body more than antlers. If you shoot them before 3.5 years they are never showing their true antler potential.
Genetics: The most overblown and non relevant component of the big buck argument anywhere that has only a purpose to cause PA deer hunters to get into arguments and fights quicker than talking politics or religion.
The best research I've seen on all of this that hasn't been mentioned is its not mom or dad's genetics or what they were eating, and its not what the trophy or spike buck is eating, but its what grandma was eating. Based on a 20+ year study in Mississippi, that investigated the "poor" genetics question, most bucks will have similar antler potential and growth if their grandmas were put in an environment that had good nutrition. If grandma isn't eating well, the genes for growing big antlers are not going to be expressed in future generations.
I was talking to my allergist a few weeks ago and he said a similar thing happens to the grandchildren of mothers that smoke while pregnant with a daughter. The daughter's eggs are all developed when she is in her mother. When grandma has her daughter and the daughter's offspring have a high probability of having asthma.
What does this mean. If the PGC started getting the deer in check in the early 2000's and it took 10 years for the habitat to improve, grandma born in 2010 would likely have her first doe fawn in 2012 and she would probably have her first buck fawn no earlier than 2014. As far as spikes and forkies, could they be the offspring of fawn does that were bred during the second rut if they were up to weight?