What is "Success" in 2010?

[MBAGuy]

We've been going around and around on here with regard to how success will be defined next season. Is it W/L? Is it about improvement in offensive and defensive rankings both in the Big Ten and NCAA? Or is it about seeing significant contributions from RFr and Sophomores as a sign that 2011 will be a special season?

Next year's schedule is ridiculously tough. Most of our traditionally "winnable" conference games are on the road (Purdue, Illinois, and MSU), while we've got this year's top three, OSU, PSU, and Iowa at home. Five to seven wins (2-4 conference wins) is what I would consider to be the probable outcome of that schedule and that is probably insufficient to be deemed a success in the minds of most Gopher fans in Brew's 4th year.

One can get more nuanced in the judging of wins and losses by looking at the quality of wins. Brewster is justifiably criticized for his lack of trophy and/or signature wins. In my opinion, 5-7 wins in 2010 can be deemed a success if we are able to 1) beat Iowa or Wisconsin AND 2) give OSU and PSU a legitimate run for their money. That, to me, means being within 10 points (while actually scoring some points) going into the 4th quarter. We've done a reasonably good job this year of winning the games we should win (Illinois and ISU are the obvious exceptions), but we've failed to pull an upset of any kind (MSU is arguably an upset, though at I recall, the line was +2.5, which is a minor upset, at best). We need some movement in this area.

With respect to improvement in offensive and defensive ranking irrespective of W/Ls, this is a tricky measurement of success. I'm not sure about the extent to which rankings are correlated with wins, but I suspect there is a pretty strong relationship between the two. To look at rankings independently of W/Ls (which would be necessary to use it as a separate measure of success) we can use improvement in the respective rankings. On offense, the Gophers rank last in both yards per game (306.5 v. Iowa at 330, who were 10th)) and points per game (20.9 v. Iowa at 23.1, who again were 10th) in the Big Ten. On defense, the Gophers were tied for 5th in passing defense (217.5 yards per game) and 7th in rushing defense (151.7 yards per game). (Scoring stats were unavailable when I was looking this up, but I'd suspect we're in the middle to lower third of the conference).

This suggests we have a lot of room for improvement on offense, with literally nowhere to go but up and are at reasonable parity with the rest of the conference on the defensive side of the ball. In my opinion, we should be aiming to be ranked 4, 5, or 6 on both offense and defense. We seem to have the horses on offense to improve. With even average QB play, we have a solid stable of WRs to hurt opponents; our OL has improved over the year with all starters returning in 2010 and supplemented with Olson, Michel, and Gjere; and we should have some options at RB next year to see if something finally works. Defensively, we lose nine of our starters from this year, but athletically, we should be in good shape. In short, if we can move from last in the conference on offense to a ranking of 5-7 and integrate new players but keep our current defensive ranking, I would have to deem the season a success. This would be independent of W/Ls, but it stands to reason that if our offense improved to that extent while the defense stayed consistent with 2009's performance, we would see an improvement in W/Ls.

The final measure of success would be the contribution from young players to give us hope for 2011. This is almost too nebulous to use as a true measure, but the hope for the future is really all we've had as Gopher fans for the last 40 years, so it's worth mentioning. We've seen quite a bit of the young talent on the squad this year, but not to the extent where it gives us a ton of confidence that next year is a breakthrough. Mcknight, Cooper, Carter, Singleton, Gray, et al. were all solid contributors, but were largely relegated to playing second fiddle to the upperclass incumbents. To deem next year a success by some "hope for the future" metric, we'd need to see significant contributions from the young bucks that may not necessarily translate into on-the-field success. I really don't even know how to measure this, other than to say I'll know it when I see it. :)

Thoughts? I'd really like to have a constructive dialogue on how the Brew lovers and haters will be gauging success next year.

[Studwell55]

Success? I dunno. First things first: we need to reach .500 in the B10.

[gopherbadgerman]

We've been going around and around on here with regard to how success will be defined next season. Is it W/L? Is it about improvement in offensive and defensive rankings both in the Big Ten and NCAA? Or is it about seeing significant contributions from RFr and Sophomores as a sign that 2011 will be a special season?

Next year's schedule is ridiculously tough. Most of our traditionally "winnable" conference games are on the road (Purdue, Illinois, and MSU), while we've got this year's top three, OSU, PSU, and Iowa at home. Five to seven wins (2-4 conference wins) is what I would consider to be the probable outcome of that schedule and that is probably insufficient to be deemed a success in the minds of most Gopher fans in Brew's 4th year.

One can get more nuanced in the judging of wins and losses by looking at the quality of wins. Brewster is justifiably criticized for his lack of trophy and/or signature wins. In my opinion, 5-7 wins in 2010 can be deemed a success if we are able to 1) beat Iowa or Wisconsin AND 2) give OSU and PSU a legitimate run for their money. That, to me, means being within 10 points (while actually scoring some points) going into the 4th quarter. We've done a reasonably good job this year of winning the games we should win (Illinois and ISU are the obvious exceptions), but we've failed to pull an upset of any kind (MSU is arguably an upset, though at I recall, the line was +2.5, which is a minor upset, at best). We need some movement in this area.

With respect to improvement in offensive and defensive ranking irrespective of W/Ls, this is a tricky measurement of success. I'm not sure about the extent to which rankings are correlated with wins, but I suspect there is a pretty strong relationship between the two. To look at rankings independently of W/Ls (which would be necessary to use it as a separate measure of success) we can use improvement in the respective rankings. On offense, the Gophers rank last in both yards per game (306.5 v. Iowa at 330, who were 10th)) and points per game (20.9 v. Iowa at 23.1, who again were 10th) in the Big Ten. On defense, the Gophers were tied for 5th in passing defense (217.5 yards per game) and 7th in rushing defense (151.7 yards per game). (Scoring stats were unavailable when I was looking this up, but I'd suspect we're in the middle to lower third of the conference).

This suggests we have a lot of room for improvement on offense, with literally nowhere to go but up and are at reasonable parity with the rest of the conference on the defensive side of the ball. In my opinion, we should be aiming to be ranked 4, 5, or 6 on both offense and defense. We seem to have the horses on offense to improve. With even average QB play, we have a solid stable of WRs to hurt opponents; our OL has improved over the year with all starters returning in 2010 and supplemented with Olson, Michel, and Gjere; and we should have some options at RB next year to see if something finally works. Defensively, we lose nine of our starters from this year, but athletically, we should be in good shape. In short, if we can move from last in the conference on offense to a ranking of 5-7 and integrate new players but keep our current defensive ranking, I would have to deem the season a success. This would be independent of W/Ls, but it stands to reason that if our offense improved to that extent while the defense stayed consistent with 2009's performance, we would see an improvement in W/Ls.

The final measure of success would be the contribution from young players to give us hope for 2011. This is almost too nebulous to use as a true measure, but the hope for the future is really all we've had as Gopher fans for the last 40 years, so it's worth mentioning. We've seen quite a bit of the young talent on the squad this year, but not to the extent where it gives us a ton of confidence that next year is a breakthrough. Mcknight, Cooper, Carter, Singleton, Gray, et al. were all solid contributors, but were largely relegated to playing second fiddle to the upperclass incumbents. To deem next year a success by some "hope for the future" metric, we'd need to see significant contributions from the young bucks that may not necessarily translate into on-the-field success. I really don't even know how to measure this, other than to say I'll know it when I see it. :)

Thoughts? I'd really like to have a constructive dialogue on how the Brew lovers and haters will be gauging success next year.

Just my opinion, but 6 wins and and one upset without "giving" any games away would be a successful season to me. I can stand losses on the road and at home to USC, as long as we win the games we are "suppossed" to win. A win at home against Iowas would be nice too...

[GopherHomer]

I'm not going to put a record on it. With our tough schedule, we could have some very encouraging losses. I think we'll win between 4-7 games but within that it could be impressive or unimpressive. I want to see some redshirt sophomores and juniors take big jumps.

[gophergrad]

A .500 season with a trophy game win would be a success for me.

[loki]

1 or 2 wins; no wins versus Wisconsin or Iowa and no bowl. Brewster gets a contract extention forever.

[gophersmokes]

One measure of success has to be the buzz the program can create. The stadium buzz seems to be wearing off and to get students and other fence sitters fired up will take a big, impressive win - particularly on national tv and particularly at home. Beating USC may be a pipe dream but it would be awesome. The Gophers also need to keep from tanking late in the season. So to answer the question I guess I'd say the Gophers need a marquee win (USC, PSU, OSU), win at least 6 games, and win two of the last three - to be a success in my eyes.

p.s. - throw in Floyd or the Axe too

[ajokeright]

We've been going around and around on here with regard to how success will be defined next season. Is it W/L? Is it about improvement in offensive and defensive rankings both in the Big Ten and NCAA? Or is it about seeing significant contributions from RFr and Sophomores as a sign that 2011 will be a special season?

Next year's schedule is ridiculously tough. Most of our traditionally "winnable" conference games are on the road (Purdue, Illinois, and MSU), while we've got this year's top three, OSU, PSU, and Iowa at home. Five to seven wins (2-4 conference wins) is what I would consider to be the probable outcome of that schedule and that is probably insufficient to be deemed a success in the minds of most Gopher fans in Brew's 4th year.

One can get more nuanced in the judging of wins and losses by looking at the quality of wins. Brewster is justifiably criticized for his lack of trophy and/or signature wins. In my opinion, 5-7 wins in 2010 can be deemed a success if we are able to 1) beat Iowa or Wisconsin AND 2) give OSU and PSU a legitimate run for their money. That, to me, means being within 10 points (while actually scoring some points) going into the 4th quarter. We've done a reasonably good job this year of winning the games we should win (Illinois and ISU are the obvious exceptions), but we've failed to pull an upset of any kind (MSU is arguably an upset, though at I recall, the line was +2.5, which is a minor upset, at best). We need some movement in this area.

With respect to improvement in offensive and defensive ranking irrespective of W/Ls, this is a tricky measurement of success. I'm not sure about the extent to which rankings are correlated with wins, but I suspect there is a pretty strong relationship between the two. To look at rankings independently of W/Ls (which would be necessary to use it as a separate measure of success) we can use improvement in the respective rankings. On offense, the Gophers rank last in both yards per game (306.5 v. Iowa at 330, who were 10th)) and points per game (20.9 v. Iowa at 23.1, who again were 10th) in the Big Ten. On defense, the Gophers were tied for 5th in passing defense (217.5 yards per game) and 7th in rushing defense (151.7 yards per game). (Scoring stats were unavailable when I was looking this up, but I'd suspect we're in the middle to lower third of the conference).

This suggests we have a lot of room for improvement on offense, with literally nowhere to go but up and are at reasonable parity with the rest of the conference on the defensive side of the ball. In my opinion, we should be aiming to be ranked 4, 5, or 6 on both offense and defense. We seem to have the horses on offense to improve. With even average QB play, we have a solid stable of WRs to hurt opponents; our OL has improved over the year with all starters returning in 2010 and supplemented with Olson, Michel, and Gjere; and we should have some options at RB next year to see if something finally works. Defensively, we lose nine of our starters from this year, but athletically, we should be in good shape. In short, if we can move from last in the conference on offense to a ranking of 5-7 and integrate new players but keep our current defensive ranking, I would have to deem the season a success. This would be independent of W/Ls, but it stands to reason that if our offense improved to that extent while the defense stayed consistent with 2009's performance, we would see an improvement in W/Ls.

The final measure of success would be the contribution from young players to give us hope for 2011. This is almost too nebulous to use as a true measure, but the hope for the future is really all we've had as Gopher fans for the last 40 years, so it's worth mentioning. We've seen quite a bit of the young talent on the squad this year, but not to the extent where it gives us a ton of confidence that next year is a breakthrough. Mcknight, Cooper, Carter, Singleton, Gray, et al. were all solid contributors, but were largely relegated to playing second fiddle to the upperclass incumbents. To deem next year a success by some "hope for the future" metric, we'd need to see significant contributions from the young bucks that may not necessarily translate into on-the-field success. I really don't even know how to measure this, other than to say I'll know it when I see it.

Since you are the one with an MBA you must be in a position to hire people.

[MBAGuy]

Since you are the one with an MBA you must be in a position to hire people.

Was there actually a question there somewhere? Or did you have a statement for me?

In either case, I have no idea what you're trying to say.

[BleedGopher]

5 wins minimum in the BT along with a win over at least UW or Iowa.

Go Gophers!!

[charlesbenjamin7]

Yep...that's it. Let's play down expectations once again. Y'all make me sick.

[ajokeright]

MBA...sorry. I pushed the wrong button. I decided to leave out the smart ass question about you hiring people and tried to take it out.

Question for you is you have indicated all on field types of measurement of success.

How about the academics and police blotter types of things. Will they be counted in your evalution of success?

[MBAGuy]

Yep...that's it. Let's play down expectations once again. Y'all make me sick.

So what is success for you? 9-10 wins? Conference championship?

I would honestly like to know.

[frozengopher]

A 2:1 td/int ratio from the QB position, one 1000 yd rusher, get the God blessed Axe, then the stupid Oinker. I could care less about our record if we have competence on offense. If we have that, the wins will come together. I expect the same or better out of our defense even though we're replacing a lot of seniors. Here comes the athleticism.

I really, really want to believe in Jedd Fisch. Give me competence at the quarterback position and a back who can blow people over with the truck stick. The line put together more than enough 3-4+ second protections toward the end of the season, and we have some young guys that are apparently stronger coming up on the line. Record aside, all I want are competitive scores or big time blowouts with us on the winning side.

I know, I know, we can't settle for close games, yada yada yada. I'm not you. This is how I take my Gopher football. I'm only in my mid 20's and I plan on being a homer for life. If I set my expectations too high I'll become a bitter Saturday afternoon poster like the rest of the mouth breathers. I, nor anyone else, wants that. Go Gophers, go get 'em Brew.

[dbuton]

success is a team that actually gets better from thier first game to their last. If that happens they should be better, hard to be worse though

[MBAGuy]

MBA...sorry. I pushed the wrong button. I decided to leave out the smart ass question about you hiring people and tried to take it out.

Question for you is you have indicated all on field types of measurement of success.

How about the academics and police blotter types of things. Will they be counted in your evalution of success?

No sweat. If you were going for would I hire Brewster now, my answer would be no. But I wouldn't have hired him to begin with. My support for him now is more oriented toward having to dance with the one that brought me, since it seems to be certain he'll be here next year.

That's a fair question and a tough one. Right or wrong, off-the-field shenanigans seem easier to tolerate when the team is winning. I don't know that anything that took place this year is all that different than what happens with other programs. Anything much worse would need to be addressed on a case-by-case basis, but in general I would hope we'd see nothing worse than the blotter incidents this past year.

Academically, it seems like we're already successful. As I recall, we had the third most all academic team members in the conference, which says a lot. Dandridge and Brock are obviously disappointing, but that's just going to happen.

[PlayHosea]

If they don't win the National Championship, they've failed. Is that realistic, ChuckBen7?

[minibeaver]

I would like to see a team that doesn't implode on a regular basis. A team that doesn't shoot themselves in the foot when we really need them to make a play. Thats the most painful thing about being a gopher fan, not the lack of talent, not even the losses necessarily. The games that we have a chance to win next year we need to win them. Had we done that this year we would have the Axe and Floyd.

[Izatys98]

We've been going around and around on here with regard to how success will be defined next season. Is it W/L? Is it about improvement in offensive and defensive rankings both in the Big Ten and NCAA? Or is it about seeing significant contributions from RFr and Sophomores as a sign that 2011 will be a special season?

Next year's schedule is ridiculously tough. Most of our traditionally "winnable" conference games are on the road (Purdue, Illinois, and MSU), while we've got this year's top three, OSU, PSU, and Iowa at home. Five to seven wins (2-4 conference wins) is what I would consider to be the probable outcome of that schedule and that is probably insufficient to be deemed a success in the minds of most Gopher fans in Brew's 4th year.

One can get more nuanced in the judging of wins and losses by looking at the quality of wins. Brewster is justifiably criticized for his lack of trophy and/or signature wins. In my opinion, 5-7 wins in 2010 can be deemed a success if we are able to 1) beat Iowa or Wisconsin AND 2) give OSU and PSU a legitimate run for their money. That, to me, means being within 10 points (while actually scoring some points) going into the 4th quarter. We've done a reasonably good job this year of winning the games we should win (Illinois and ISU are the obvious exceptions), but we've failed to pull an upset of any kind (MSU is arguably an upset, though at I recall, the line was +2.5, which is a minor upset, at best). We need some movement in this area.

With respect to improvement in offensive and defensive ranking irrespective of W/Ls, this is a tricky measurement of success. I'm not sure about the extent to which rankings are correlated with wins, but I suspect there is a pretty strong relationship between the two. To look at rankings independently of W/Ls (which would be necessary to use it as a separate measure of success) we can use improvement in the respective rankings. On offense, the Gophers rank last in both yards per game (306.5 v. Iowa at 330, who were 10th)) and points per game (20.9 v. Iowa at 23.1, who again were 10th) in the Big Ten. On defense, the Gophers were tied for 5th in passing defense (217.5 yards per game) and 7th in rushing defense (151.7 yards per game). (Scoring stats were unavailable when I was looking this up, but I'd suspect we're in the middle to lower third of the conference).

This suggests we have a lot of room for improvement on offense, with literally nowhere to go but up and are at reasonable parity with the rest of the conference on the defensive side of the ball. In my opinion, we should be aiming to be ranked 4, 5, or 6 on both offense and defense. We seem to have the horses on offense to improve. With even average QB play, we have a solid stable of WRs to hurt opponents; our OL has improved over the year with all starters returning in 2010 and supplemented with Olson, Michel, and Gjere; and we should have some options at RB next year to see if something finally works. Defensively, we lose nine of our starters from this year, but athletically, we should be in good shape. In short, if we can move from last in the conference on offense to a ranking of 5-7 and integrate new players but keep our current defensive ranking, I would have to deem the season a success. This would be independent of W/Ls, but it stands to reason that if our offense improved to that extent while the defense stayed consistent with 2009's performance, we would see an improvement in W/Ls.

The final measure of success would be the contribution from young players to give us hope for 2011. This is almost too nebulous to use as a true measure, but the hope for the future is really all we've had as Gopher fans for the last 40 years, so it's worth mentioning. We've seen quite a bit of the young talent on the squad this year, but not to the extent where it gives us a ton of confidence that next year is a breakthrough. Mcknight, Cooper, Carter, Singleton, Gray, et al. were all solid contributors, but were largely relegated to playing second fiddle to the upperclass incumbents. To deem next year a success by some "hope for the future" metric, we'd need to see significant contributions from the young bucks that may not necessarily translate into on-the-field success. I really don't even know how to measure this, other than to say I'll know it when I see it. :)

Thoughts? I'd really like to have a constructive dialogue on how the Brew lovers and haters will be gauging success next year.

MBAGuy - great post. I hope that many of the ardent Brewster supporters weigh in so that we have something to go back to come this time next year.

Personally I am expecting 4 maybe 5 wins next year. The games against MTSU and NIU aren't sure fire wins and USC, well... I would be willing to accept such a record, just as I was the year that Mason's squad was down and got blown out by Toledo, IF there is something tangible we can hang our hats on. It starts with establishing an offensive identity and a game plan that makes sense from week to week. This doesn't mean that we have to score 30+ points every week. Rather I'd like to see a solid game plan implemented in the first half of games and continuation of the trend of decent second half adjustments as necessary. It also means that we commit to a QB and a RB who take center stage every game. The revolving door we had at both positions, while it makes sense at times, makes it hard for players (and fans) to get into the rhythm of the game. On the defensive side, they need to be competitive and approach this year's level of play. It would be a definite positive if we could get more 3 and outs next year as well. As for the young players, they do need to step up and show meaningful signs that their potential will translate on the field. This may be the most important piece of the puzzle for Brewster. All the talk about recruiting successes will be rendered moot if there are clear signs it means something on Saturdays - in 2010 or the future.

There will be a lot of turnover on the 2-deeps next year. I don't think we can expect a top half finish in the B10 and I'd be shocked if we make it to a bowl next year. If we are legitimately competitive week in and week out and there are no obvious signs that the coaching staff is wanting, it could be enough to warrant another year for Brewster. Grading all of this will be largely subjective - "know it when we see it". Hope springs eternal...

[EG#9]

"Success" to me next year is the same as Bleed laid out: 5 Big Ten wins including one (or both) of the Iowa and Wisconsin games.

[jovs]

A .500 season with a trophy game win would be a success for me.

Ditto

Ability to move the ball some and score at least one offensive touchdown each against USC, Penn State, Ohio State, and Iowa.

[GG07]

8-4 with win over BADgers or Iowa. And maybe even PSU

[gopherguts]

the Gophs will be lucky to beat N. Illinois next year and South Dakota may give them a scare

[Pewterschmidt]

5-7 or worse = huge disappointment. Brewster gets canned
6-6 = Disappointed and Brewster probably gets fired
7-5 = Can live with it, especially if one or two of those wins are against Iowa or Wisconsin.
8-4 or better = Success

[stevedave23]

Great question by the OP.

IMHO success would be two things:

1) Play well and win against all teams that you should beat
2) Win a big game at Home (USC, PSU, OSU or IA)

IMO these are the things that keep fans happy and engaged. Nothing kills support for the gophers each season like a loss to a team the they should beat. Similarly, I think a big win at home against a favored team would drum up lots of excitement. I think if the gophers do those two things the record will follow.

[WAGopher]

For me, the Gophers marginally improved over last year. They played a tougher schedule and were in all but 2 games (PSU and OSU). They didn't take at the end of the year as demonstrated by holding Iowa to 12 points, and the defense was mostly sound despite being on the field too much. However, any gains by the defense and special teams was nearly negated by the offense. Coming into the year, I thought the most glaring problem on O was the line. I'm no longer as concerned about the O line as they seemed to improve during the season and have some talent coming up. However, I am very concerned about QB and RB. The QB has been dissected here enough, but the RBs also need to be much improved next year if we're going to compete. Let's face it, none of our current backs have done the job. I thought Eskridge was our best back and should have been featured more. Bennet was okay and I thought Whaley was used too often. None of our backs showed the ability to consistently find the hole or crease. MQ Gray showed more ability running the ball than our 3 backs. I think Eskridge gets better and hopefully Whaley can gain some strength and confidence to be the change of pace back.

With that said, I've always felt that conference wins is what we should measure our success by. We are a BCS conference so success here will also show in the polls.

[magpie]

I'm predicting a 5-7 season. With that, my success markers (from lowest to highest) would be as follows:

1) 6 Total wins

2) 5 wins and a trophy game win

3) 5 wins and a signature win over OSU, USC or PSU

4) 4+ Big Ten wins

5) 7+ Total wins

Extra Credit: Gray is starting QB

[Go Gophers Rah]

I would have said the same thing for Mason; For the Minnesota we know, success is 4 or 5 conference wins including either a) a trophy for our case, or b) a win over a legitimately ranked team. If we do those things, we should end up in the Champs Sports bowl or better.

I'm not saying that is what will be required for me to support another year with Brewster, it is just how I would define success in the near term for the Gophers.

Of course long term success MUST include a conference championship. If we don't think a coach could get us there within 5 years, he should not be our coach.

[Rotundo]

After hearing Brewster talking about the 2010 OL and the stud Hageman on the sports huddle today I think we can win 8 or more games next year.

[Brew_recruit]

success in 2010 is beating everyone at home that we are favored to beat, beat bucky and have 9 wins.

[burton34]

Firing Tim Brewster.

[badgergopher]

Anything less than 7-5 overall, 4-4 in conference would be very disappointing, anything more would be pleasing.

I think the offense will get better becasue they can hardly get worse. The big question will be all the new players on defense.

My end of season projection...

at Middle Tennessee State W
South Dakota W
Southern California L
Northern Illinois W
Northwestern W
at Wisconsin L
at Purdue W
Penn State L
Ohio State L
at Michigan State L
at Illinois W
Iowa W

[Noonan]

Consistency....and beating a team we shouldn't (OSU, PSU, Iowa, USC). For me, 2011 is when the bar gets raised.

[Think Harder]

We have a coach who took a 6-7 Insight Bowl participant who defeated Iowa for the pig, straight down to 1-11 in year one. Heading into year four, we are once again playing in the Insight Bowl, back to 6-7, but not beating Iowa or Wisconsin. Supposedly, we have far greater talent heading into 2010 than 2007, yet, some here assert 5 to 7 wins will be a success??? We start 2010 with 2 gimmes for petesake. If he stays, anything less than 8 or 9 wins in 2010 is another roaring failure! After all, we have been told we will have the next Ndamukong Suh leading the defense and the next Vince Young leading the offense in 2010.

[Think Harder]

Firing Tim Brewster.

True dat my cajun bro!

[Great Plains Gopher]

Against that schedule, seven wins would be modest success.

[monk10]

Another bowl game.

I personally would add in a win over Wiscy/Iowa, and an undefeated home season :P. (Visualizing success).

[Monty519]

Obvoiusly records don't mean much because if you told most people we would go 6-6 this year, they would have said, yeah, that sounds about right. It's more than just records. If that's the mindset you are going to take, you can't look at the final record hardly at all then. How about we focus on these things:

1) Quarterback play MUST improve. Along with that, the offense itself will obviously improve dramatically as those third down throws that miss suddenly become 1st and 10, or even touchdowns in the case of that ISU game when two easy TDs were missed. In turn this gives the offense more rhythm and more plays to succeed with.

2) Running game needs to take a step up and be more consistent, which is reliant on both better RB vision as well as better run blocking and then 2nd and 9 becomes 2nd and 4 or 5, a much different offensive approach ensues.

3) The young defensive talent needs to begin to rise up, starting with the defensive line play, specifically the edges.

Those are the three main pieces IMO for any type of success in 2010. Going into a season where more of the "talent" is more and more experienced it's really not out of the question that all three of these things could happen, and don't be surprised if you see 8, even 9 wins with good breaks. More likely 6 or 7. Looking at the schedule, I can see wins against MTSU, SoDak, NIU, Northwestern, Purdue, and yes, finally a rivalry win against Wisconsin. A win @ MSU or Illinois as well, and that's 7 wins. Play competitively against USC, OSU, PSU, and Iowa and you have yourself a decent year. This is where the breaks come in, where you could steal a big home win against one of those four.

It's really quite simple. If none of those things happen, then the on field product will show itself and Brewster will be handled accordingly. I wouldn't make assumptions either way though as the talent that will be on the field for 2010 will be better than it has been in who knows how long. Give this a chance before you blow it off as crap.

[ruralgopher]

First off, I'm a Brewster backer

To me success from a w/l standpoint is in the neighborhood of 8-4. I justify that by saying that in order for next year to a success by any defination we need to be better on the O-line, better at the running back position, better decision making at the QB position, and better a the wideout position. I think that we will get better in all of those areas with a full season under our belt with this system and another year of development with our young talent.

Assuming our D doesn't regress, and I don't think that it will, 8-4 looks very doable to me.

-Rural

[gopherguy05]

Nice to see Gopherhole doing Doogie's work for him again.....

http://www.startribune.com/yourvoices/80554212.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD 3aPc:_Yyc:aUKcOy9cP3DieyckcUsI

[Catechol]

With OSU, PSU and Iowa at home in addition to Michigan off the schedule (bad as they are, but still a thorn in the side of the Gophers), 7 wins should be the minimum expectation - either 6 wins + bowl win or 7 wins + bowl loss. Anything less would mean no bowl, and at that point I can't see Brewster coming back.

2011 schedule shapes up much worse, with away games at USC, OSU, Michigan and Iowa. If you're thinking about a title run through that gauntlet I think the timing is poor!

[Mouth Breather #1]

I'd consider it a mild success if we can convert a 1st and goal from inside the 2 yard line into 7 points.

[gopher1956]

We need to start with one Trophy and make it to the Insight Bowl would a great year!

[Schnoodler]

I don't know if success can be known without massive over achievement. We are just beginning the journey. Finally we will have a team of Brewster recruits, fast and athletic. But these kids are nto going to be experienced to make a great impact. We won't know if they are successful until the program succeeds or fails in the future.

For me it will be the same as this year. Trying to gauge if the players are improving and if it looks like we are progressing towards something. We will have to show some assemblance of being able to run an offense. It won't simply be enough to see if the various athletes are improving and depth is developing as this year.

[howeda7]

I will grade it on 3 areas: Total wins (regular season only as the decision must be made then), Trophy/'Big' wins, and Improvement in game day coaching and discipline. The grades will be as follows:

Total Wins:

8 or more = A 4.0
7 = B 3.0
6 = C 2.0
5 = D 1.0
4 or less = F 0

Tophy/Big wins (USC, PSU, Wiscy, Iowa)
2 or more = A 4.0
1 = B 3.0
0 = F 0

Improvement in Gameday coaching/Discipline: This is more subjective. The measurable totals will be # of penalties and # of timeouts burned due to simple inability get plays in on time, as well as # of off-field incidents.

Significant improvement in these areas (say 30% or more in the measurables with general gameday sideline improvement) = A 4.0
Some improvement = C 2.0
Flat = D 1.0
Worse = F 0

An average score of 3.0 means Brewster can stay. An F in any area makes him fireable even if the overall is over 3.0.

[tato2001]

Unfortunately, many of the ideas of 'success' here actually indicate the program has already failed in Brewster's tenure.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: NO ONE back in January 2007 would have, upon Brewster's hiring, said to themselves, "SWEET! We'll be back to a successful 5-7 or 6-6 by 2010!"

Expectations in 2007 are the barometer for success. We've failed.

That said, the real question isn't what is 'success' in 2010. Success would be as some have pointed out: 8-4, a trophy win, or an upset victory, or better than the Insight Bowl, etc.. Unfortunately, with where the program is now, that is not likely.

So be honest: you're not looking for success in 2010, you're looking for enough positives and hope to get you at least thinking the program is at beginning to right itself after 3 years of treading water (at best).

I still HOPE we can be successful next year. After all, success is often a lightning bolt that no one foresees. Maybe Gray will come in and take the Big Ten by storm and no one will be able to stop him. But that's merely hope. Based on the evidence, improvement is all I can expect, and that doesn't equal success. Not yet anyways...

[dpodoll68]

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: NO ONE back in January 2007 would have, upon Brewster's hiring, said to themselves, "SWEET! We'll be back to a successful 5-7 or 6-6 by 2010!"

Expectations in 2007 are the barometer for success. We've failed.

Everyone always thinks things are better than they're going to be.

I will turn 30 years old in a little less than 2 months. Back when I was 17 and King Turd of Sh*t Hill, when the world was my oyster, I figured I'd be making six figures, easy, and have a high-profile, high-visibility job by the time I was 30.

Since none of these things are even remotely true, should I deem myself a failure? What do you suggest I do? Slit my wrists and call it a day?

[tato2001]

Everyone always thinks things are better than they're going to be.

I will turn 30 years old in a little less than 2 months. Back when I was 17 and King Turd of Sh*t Hill, when the world was my oyster, I figured I'd be making six figures, easy, and have a high-profile, high-visibility job by the time I was 30.

Since none of these things are even remotely true, should I deem myself a failure? What do you suggest I do? Slit my wrists and call it a day?

Nope. You should realize that you were young and naive when you were 17, and had a silly definition of 'success'. I think if you look around at your fellow high school graduates, some of them ARE making six figures easy and have high-visibility jobs by the time they are 30. If you still measure success by making six figures and whether or not you have a high-visibility job, hate to break this to you, but you HAVE failed relative to them. If that's still your idea of success, you're probably working on ways to get to where they already are. I'm guessing you've changed your definition of success, or would acknowledge you haven't succeeded YET.

With football, though, measuring success is EASY, doesn't CHANGE, and EVERYONE agrees on the definition: Wins. End of story. It's a sport. Each game has one winner and one loser. 'Good losses' might measure improvement, but no one sets a definition of success to have a losing record and good losses 4 years after they start.

Do you think it was naive of anyone to expect the Gophers to be better than 5-7 or 6-6 by 2010 back 2007? That's pretty depressing.

[Bob_Loblaw]

I don't think I had the same expectations as you.

The reason why I was sick of Mason was that I didn't think Mason could ever coach a team that got over the hump. My definition of success was merely to have a team that makes a bowl every year (once we get rolling), would play on Jan 1 (Capital or Outback) every 2-4 years and compete and make a Rose Bowl.

My expectations were probably a bit more conservative than yours. I followed the Big 10 when Kirk Ferentz was hired, when Barry Alvarez was hired, when Mason was hired....and I think to expect to be playing on a Jan. 1 bowl game is unrealistic after 3 seasons. Of Ferentz's 11 seasons, 6 of them he has won 7 or less games, 5 seasons he didn't break .500 in the Big 10, and he is one of the best coaches in college football.

I am not saying their weren't expectations by some people (local media and some posters), but I never thought a guy who was known as a recruiter was going to come to the U of MN and win big while his first full (real) recruiting class was Jrs.

I was not pumped when we hired Brewster, but if your expectations were higher, I really think you haven't watched a ton of college football. If Brewster ever succeeds (admitted, it is a big if), it will be in years 5 and 6 when he has a program full of his recruits. If you expected a guy who was never even a coordinator before to come to MN and X and O a bunch of Mason recruits into a Jan. 1 Bowl, i'm sorry, but you were unrealistic.

[dpodoll68]

Do you think it was naive of anyone to expect the Gophers to be better than 5-7 or 6-6 by 2010 back 2007? That's pretty depressing.

In a word, yes. Actually, I don't think it's naïve, just unrealistic. I don't at all consider it realistic to expect a program that has been mediocre (at best) for the better part of 5 decades to come in and set the world on fire in 3 years. We could have very easily won 8 or 9 games this year, I will grant you that. But we just as easily could have won 4 or 5. We are exactly at Mason levels (or even slightly better, considering strength of schedule), and yet Brewster's feet are being held to the fire? It just blows my mind. Anyone who looked at this year's schedule realistically, and saw more than 8 wins at the very best, is deluding themselves into thinking Rome can be built in a day.

Some programs are able to turn things around quickly. Some implode even further. The vast majority, however, regress to their previous state. I don't understand how Brewster can be castigated for sitting smack dab in the middle of the bell curve. The upcoming talent indicates we will be moving toward the right of that curve. If that is not the case by 2011, send him down the river. Until then, sit back and enjoy depth and breadth of talent that hasn't been seen around here in at least a decade.

[buddylee853]

Buddylee's successful season: *ahem...

1. Upset at least one ranked team (USC at top of wishlist).

2. At least one trophy game win

3. At least a tying record at home (tough considering schedule, but doable).

4. Make it to any bowl, EXCLUDING Little Caesars and the Insight

5. 8-win season or better

I feel like getting that list completed will show clear and substantial improvement on a local AND national perspective, and believe me, this program NEEDS it!

[badgergopher]

First off, I'm a Brewster backer

To me success from a w/l standpoint is in the neighborhood of 8-4. I justify that by saying that in order for next year to a success by any defination we need to be better on the O-line, better at the running back position, better decision making at the QB position, and better a the wideout position. I think that we will get better in all of those areas with a full season under our belt with this system and another year of development with our young talent.

Assuming our D doesn't regress, and I don't think that it will, 8-4 looks very doable to me.

-Rural

Here is the tough part. OSU, Iowa, PSU, and UW all beat top 15 teams in bowl games. That is only the second time it's happened since the BCS started (saw that on ESPN last night). Of the four, I think only PSU will lose key parts (QB, Bowman, ...). The other three return their QB's.

I think anything better than 0-3 against that group is good (and obviously would be an improvement over this year). A lot of new players on D, and a shaky offense make me think that 7-5, 4-4 is about as much improvement as we'll see from the Gophers.

They could start 6-1, 3-0 however if they upset UW (and lose to SC), which would make TCF a rockin' madhouse when PSU comes to town.

[ruralgopher]

OK, but to me there is a difference between a succesful season and a season where Brewster should be fired. To me a Succesful season next year would be 8-4, but I think that barring NCAA scandal Brewster should be given a 5th year regardless of nexlt years w-l record.