Official 2016 Recruiting Updates Thread: Links, Tweets, Videos, Stories, Rumors, etc.

Donate To GopherHole




<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="pl" dir="ltr">B1G 2016 Recruiting Update Ranking based on Star's 1 UM 2 MSU 3. PSU 4 OSU 5 Neb
6 UW 7 Maryland 8 NU 9 Minn 10 RU 11 Iowa 12 IU13 PU 14 IL</p>— Gerry DiNardo (@gerrydinardo) <a href="https://twitter.com/gerrydinardo/status/691631216659804160">January 25, 2016</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Go Gophers!!
 



hungan1 said:
Would he have qualified academically? I thought there was an old posting speculating that transferring from school to school caused some academic issues.
Click to expand...

Decommited and would not have qualified at MN. Think he quit football.
 

RickDornsby said:
No, I'm saying it is warranted.

1. Claeys has a short contract.
2. We have a senior QB.
3. The schedule is lined up for him to go 9-3 and get a contract.
Click to expand...

So what else could he do? Please explain HOW Claeys could hurt us down the road by trying to win now. I just don't see a path like that. Even if the motivation might be there, as you suggest.

RickDornsby said:
but really you want 2-3 promising ones because odds say that only 1 will pan out. And what if that 1 gets hurt?
Click to expand...

OH! I get it now. Just recruit 2-3 promising high school recruits at every position. Brilliant. Thanks for clearing that up.
 

Maroon&GoldLivesMatter said:
So what else could he do? Please explain HOW Claeys could hurt us down the road by trying to win now. I just don't see a path like that. Even if the motivation might be there, as you suggest.



OH! I get it now. Just recruit 2-3 promising high school recruits at every position. Brilliant. Thanks for clearing that up.
Click to expand...

We just need to get all 4 and 5 star recruits.
 



JoJo isn't even going to graduate high school....so can we please all give up that pipe dream.
 

Getting back to the idea of JUCOs representing a "need to win now" attitude.

As I see it, there are two main reasons for recuiting JUCOs.

1. to fill an immediate area of need: i.e. - Team X has no veteran OL returning, so go out and a sign a couple of JUCOs to hold down the fort until the HS recruits are ready.

2. To bring in a player who is (theoretically) ready to play on day 1. A JUCO has 1 or 2 years of post-HS playing experience, and should be more physically and mentally mature than a true FR.

Bill Snyder used to use a ton of JUCO's at K-State, and he did OK with that approach.

it doesn't mean you're mortgaging the furniture.
 

Maroon&GoldLivesMatter said:
So what else could he do? Please explain HOW Claeys could hurt us down the road by trying to win now. I just don't see a path like that. Even if the motivation might be there, as you suggest.



OH! I get it now. Just recruit 2-3 promising high school recruits at every position. Brilliant. Thanks for clearing that up.
Click to expand...

How could he hurt us by trying to go "all in" now? The other major revenue-generating sport coach is showing you exactly how.

And to the 2-3 recruits line...not all JuCos fit in well. I wasn't saying recruit 2-3 Alabama caliber recruits...I'm saying recruit mostly incoming freshmen that you like and develop them. If we continue to use scholarship spots with JuCos then you're going to have the exact same problems down the road...maybe in 2017 the defensive backfield will be a barren wasteland (just making an example).
 

Do any other successful BIG teams sign 5-7 JuCo guys regularly? I'm not saying it is the worst strategy, as a lot of Big 12 schools do OK with it, but the BIG seems like most a sign-and-develop league. OSU and the likes seem to bring one in every once in a while but generally take a blue chip grad transfer if there. More comparable programs like Iowa and Wisky - Iowa does a bit, Wisky almost never does (I think they started to under Andersen). Sure I'd take Russell Wilson as a grad transfer, but not all JuCos are going to fit in.

You can't not acknowledge the negative side to it. "Well, we just needed some upper-level depth at d-back and the offensive line...we have some young recruits at those spots." Guess what, maybe you're ignoring WR or LB to plug the holes and you're going to have the same problem in 2 years at those positions when the 1 young guy you were counting on at LB is a bust or transfers away.
 



RickDornsby said:
How could he hurt us by trying to go "all in" now? The other major revenue-generating sport coach is showing you exactly how.
Click to expand...

Admittedly I am not a basketball fan, (I'd rather watch tax returns be prepared) but how does losing to minor programs and every Big Ten game equate to going "all in now?" If that is the case, I'd hate to see the future!
 

RickDornsby said:
Do any other successful BIG teams sign 5-7 JuCo guys regularly? I'm not saying it is the worst strategy, as a lot of Big 12 schools do OK with it, but the BIG seems like most a sign-and-develop league. OSU and the likes seem to bring one in every once in a while but generally take a blue chip grad transfer if there. More comparable programs like Iowa and Wisky - Iowa does a bit, Wisky almost never does (I think they started to under Andersen). Sure I'd take Russell Wilson as a grad transfer, but not all JuCos are going to fit in.

You can't not acknowledge the negative side to it. "Well, we just needed some upper-level depth at d-back and the offensive line...we have some young recruits at those spots." Guess what, maybe you're ignoring WR or LB to plug the holes and you're going to have the same problem in 2 years at those positions when the 1 young guy you were counting on at LB is a bust or transfers away.
Click to expand...
Some basic math, 85 scholarships total, spread over 5 years means, if you keep everyone you can only sign 17 players a year. There is plenty of wiggle room in those numbers to allow for bringing in a few Juco players. While it might not be tradition in the Big 10, it's been done successfully for years, in the Pac 12 and Big 12. I don't care about tradition especially the part about the Gophers being a bottom tier team. The Juco players, this staff has brought in have been a net plus, as long as they stay at four to five per year level I don't see a problem.
 

Tlsbhansen said:
Admittedly I am not a basketball fan, (I'd rather watch tax returns be prepared) but how does losing to minor programs and every Big Ten game equate to going "all in now?" If that is the case, I'd hate to see the future!
Click to expand...

His first year, he brought in several juco/transfer players to win for some of the upperclassmen he had. The cupboard became bare in the current junior/senior classes. The only ones he has are JuCos that provide negative value.
 

nsmike said:
Some basic math, 85 scholarships total, spread over 5 years means, if you keep everyone you can only sign 17 players a year. There is plenty of wiggle room in those numbers to allow for bringing in a few Juco players. While it might not be tradition in the Big 10, it'sbeen done successfully for years, in the Pac 12 and Big 12. I don't care about tradition especially the part about the gophers being a bottom tier team. The Juco players, this staff has brought in have been a net plus, as long as they stay at four to five per year level I don't see a problem.
Click to expand...

It can work in certain places and maybe it will here. You can't just say "well there's a ton of scholarships."

We consistently have terrible depth. We're now likely risking our future depth. We complained about injuries all year while Wisky (a lot) and Iowa (some) found replacement-level guys who had been developed in the system to save their seasons when the injury bug hit them.
 

John Galt said:
Snelson might be slower than Hayo. He has to the most over-hyped recruit in the 10 years that I've followed Gopher football recruiting.
Click to expand...
Snelson aside, wouldn't it make more sense to see how a recruit's college career pans out before declaring them overhyped?
 

RickDornsby said:
His first year, he brought in several juco/transfer players to win for some of the upperclassmen he had. The cupboard became bare in the current junior/senior classes. The only ones he has are JuCos that provide negative value.
Click to expand...

Makes sense...thanks for the clarification...as stated, I don't keep up with B-ball so this helps.
 

RickDornsby said:
It can work in certain places and maybe it will here. You can't just say "well there's a ton of scholarships."

We consistently have terrible depth. We're now likely risking our future depth. We complained about injuries all year while Wisky (a lot) and Iowa (some) found replacement-level guys who had been developed in the system to save their seasons when the injury bug hit them.
Click to expand...

If we can put ourselves in a position to win now; we can use that advantage in the future to recruit quality players to meet our needs.

This year, we seem have recruited quite a few Athletes and JuCos. Several of our best players have been recruited as Athletes and later developed into Stars (see Eric Murray and Da'Jon McKnight).

I wouldn't get bent out of shape at this point - it's not even NSD.

If the team comes out looking shabby at the start of the B1G schedule, then it's time to worry.
 

RickDornsby said:
It can work in certain places and maybe it will here. You can't just say "well there's a ton of scholarships."

We consistently have terrible depth. We're now likely risking our future depth. We complained about injuries all year while Wisky (a lot) and Iowa (some) found replacement-level guys who had been developed in the system to save their seasons when the injury bug hit them.
Click to expand...

I don't agree with that. We had bad depth at a few areas on the offensive and defensive lines but most other areas we have been able to do okay. Our secondary held up pretty well considering all the injuries. The trenches is where it is the most difficult to build depth in my opinion and it just generally takes longer. Next year I think DT will finally have lots of depth.

As for Juco's, it totally makes sense to go after a few guys on the OL since we lost 3 guys who could have returned for another season (Lauer, Hayes, Bobek). It also helps to even out the classes a little bit. If they didn't bring in the Juco's, we'd only have 3 OL upperclassmen.

I will also add that this staff has done a good job of bringing in quality Juco's. Guys like Roland Johnson, Damien Wilson, BBC, Campbell, and Poock have all made big impacts.

Iowa and Wisconsin should have more depth than us. They have both been a lot more successful than us.
 

I actually think that the JuCos will generally help this season, and this our season to win.

I just think it hurts program depth 2 years from now.
 


RickDornsby said:
I just think it hurts program depth 2 years from now.
Click to expand...

This makes no sense. A Juco or Sr graduate...same, same. Our depth issues are more injury related and recruiting misses. Can't make a FR become a R-JR in one year, but you can fill that gap with a Juco while your underclassmen continue to develop. If more misses/injuries happen, you might be back to Juco, but not necessarily.
 

RickDornsby said:
I actually think that the JuCos will generally help this season, and this our season to win.

I just think it hurts program depth 2 years from now.
Click to expand...

Only if you are taking Juco's at a position you already have a lot of upperclassmen. The o-linemen we are taking will even the classes out and help our depth in the future.
 


GopherinPhilly said:
This makes no sense. A Juco or Sr graduate...same, same. Our depth issues are more injury related and recruiting misses. Can't make a FR become a R-JR in one year, but you can fill that gap with a Juco while your underclassmen continue to develop. If more misses/injuries happen, you might be back to Juco, but not necessarily.
Click to expand...

Assume a 33% hit rate for recruits. If we had a class of 24 this year, that means 8 are probably starters or key players. I realize this year is more JuCo than most years, but we may take 6-8. Say we took 18 freshmen and 6 JuCos, you may have 2 less key players down the road given the hit %.

That may not seem like a lot but if it is your strategy, it adds up. You also can't redshirt as much because some of your young players are always a backup. Maybe you think losing a bit of this depth can be covered by more JuCos in 2 years, but you're again adding guys that have never been in your system.

I also think that getting a kid as a freshman gives you a better chance of developing an All BIG player.

Finally, I am all for kids getting every chance to achieve. I'm glad JuCos exist and I'm glad that kids can get back into major college programs. Most of them are great kids and just needed a different environment to succeed or had a tough situation in life.

All of that said, we are grouping ourselves with Iowa State, Kansas State, Baylor, and Tennessee. We like to talk ourselves up as a world class institution (including for athletes) and we are not exactly bringing in a bunch of top tier students. I don't see Northwestern, Purdue, Vanderbilt, ND, Wisky, Stanford bringing in a bunch of JuCos. Can't have our cake and eat it, too. Ok, I guess Purdue does take a lot of JuCos.
 

dpodoll68 said:
When exactly was basketball "all in"?
Click to expand...

It has been stated many times on the bball board that people think rock bottom this year has a little bit to do with Richard trying to win with/for the Hollinses and others by bringing in Matheiu, King, Morris, etc.
 

<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 

This program is seen as a continuation of JK s program. The clock is not starting over. They have. 2-3 yrs to have a good season, which I think will happen. We are taking this class for a grade, they want to win now and we should.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom