Local obsession

Donate To GopherHole
dpodoll68

dpodoll68

Elite Poster
Joined
Nov 24, 2008
Messages
19,252
Reaction score
837
Points
113
I'm not posting this to be a smart-aleck, or with any kind of hidden agenda. I honestly want to know what people are thinking. Whenever I hear Barreiro start talking about the "one of us" phenomenon, I usually roll my eyes and switch the dial. But after reading this message board for several years, I think he may be on to something. Whenever a coaching vacancy opens up, somebody inevitably says "Hire [insert Gopher alum here] immediately!!!!1!!!11!!" Likewise, if we have an open scholly or two, the refrain is always, "Give [local kid X] a shot, he's just not well-known, he'll really blow up if given a chance."

What is the obsession with keeping things local? I personally would rather have the best players and coaches available, regardless of where they went to school. Can anybody honestly give me a rationale as to why this is a constant refrain here? I can totally understand giving a local kid a shot as a walk-on, and lots of NFL players past and present got their start that way. But it seems to me to be utter nonsense to sign a coach or player if you're competing against yourself.
 

Agreed. And I would add that most local talent is very very very sub par (aka SUCKS)
Look Nationally for best players and coaches.
 

Just a guess here, but part of the "keep it local" may have something to do with our revolving door of coordinators (especially defense). The hope, then, is to have someone that will stick around for a while.

*shruggers*
 

dpodoll68 said:
I'm not posting this to be a smart-aleck, or with any kind of hidden agenda. I honestly want to know what people are thinking. Whenever I hear Barreiro start talking about the "one of us" phenomenon, I usually roll my eyes and switch the dial. But after reading this message board for several years, I think he may be on to something. Whenever a coaching vacancy opens up, somebody inevitably says "Hire [insert Gopher alum here] immediately!!!!1!!!11!!" Likewise, if we have an open scholly or two, the refrain is always, "Give [local kid X] a shot, he's just not well-known, he'll really blow up if given a chance."

What is the obsession with keeping things local? I personally would rather have the best players and coaches available, regardless of where they went to school. Can anybody honestly give me a rationale as to why this is a constant refrain here? I can totally understand giving a local kid a shot as a walk-on, and lots of NFL players past and present got their start that way. But it seems to me to be utter nonsense to sign a coach or player if you're competing against yourself.
Click to expand...

I don't think this is an "MN thing". I think its pretty prevalent idea in at least the Midwest. I think it comes from a bit of "hometown pride"...the idea that you want to see those you "know" (or feel that you know because you see them as having a shared background) succeed. In this case, succeed at the University you support strongly.

When it comes to recruiting I'd agree that I'd rather seek out the best talent...but there are good reasons for plugging in to this "local support" element in building up our program. As discussed previously, one of the reasons that Nebraska has such strong support across that state is because it truly is "their" team.

I think when it comes to hiring coaches the idea swings more to who will maintain and build upon the tradition of the school. That's why Callahan failed so miserably with winning fans over at Nebraska. Yes, his on field product sucked too...but he ran the program like a NFL team. He tore down, ignored, or ridiculed DECADES of Nebraska traditions and pissed off a ton of former players and alums. This was the concern at Michigan when they hired Rich Rod...that he was not a "Michigan Man" or one of "Bo's Guys". They didn't want to see their traditions messed with.
 

1. I believe it's our nature to identify with groups, with our group sometimes being driven be geographics. It's an extension of ourselves and or own pride to see local takent 'make it' and perform as well as those coaches/players from other states. I do, however, think coaches/players are quickly enveloped into 'us' once there here and wearing our colors.

2. I respectfully disagree with a poster that claims the state has considerably much less talent than other states. Yes, we know about California, Texas, Florida, etc. It's an interesting subject, but I think some is driven by population, weather, economics, exposure, stereotype, etc.

I think there's a fraction of a difference between a FBS player in comparison to an FCS; and a fraction difference between a FCS and Division II player; and a fraction of a difference between a Division II and Division III player. Sometimes a star-rating is wrong, and a 2-star or DIII player will play in the NFL. It's all a crap-shoot, when in doubt I'd stay in-state and in the surrounding areas for the most part.

I just don't think there's just a whole lot of difference between Alabama's best receiver and Minnesta's best receiver. Minnesota football players are at the same level, there just isn't the numbers that other states have.
 


danimal said:
I respectfully disagree with a poster that claims the state has considerably much less talent than other states.
Click to expand...

By a statistical analysis of any measure, you are just plain wrong. Minnesota compares favorably to, for example, the Dakotas, Montana, Wyoming, etc., but it would rank about 40th (at best) in the number of legitimate, scholarship, D-IA players it turns out on an annual basis.

danimal said:
I just don't think there's just a whole lot of difference between Alabama's best receiver and Minnesta's best receiver. Minnesota football players are at the same level, there just isn't the numbers that other states have.
Click to expand...

Of course there are exceptions (see Michael Floyd), but in an average year, Alabama's best player at position X is so much better than Minnesota's equivalent that the comparison is absurd. And Alabama turns out much more of them, by a factor of several magnitudes.
 

I would argue that our top end local talent is just as good as most states. But we are not as deep as the southern states.

MN players are farther behind developmental wise coming out of high school compared to southern states where football is pretty much year round. It takes a couple of years for them develop, compared to the southern states.
 

dpodoll68 said:
By a statistical analysis of any measure, you are just plain wrong. Minnesota compares favorably to, for example, the Dakotas, Montana, Wyoming, etc., but it would rank about 40th (at best) in the number of legitimate, scholarship, D-IA players it turns out on an annual basis.



Of course there are exceptions (see Michael Floyd), but in an average year, Alabama's best player at position X is so much better than Minnesota's equivalent that the comparison is absurd. And Alabama turns out much more of them, by a factor of several magnitudes.
Click to expand...

There goes your claim in your original post of not wanting to be 'smart-aleck' with 'no hidden agenda.' Yes, the numbers support your position, it's the 'why' behind the numbers that I find interesting.
 

Please show me where I'm being a smart-aleck. Also, I have no hidden agenda...I have posted here numerous times indicating that I don't think it's a wise move to build the basis of this team on MN players, and certainly not at the expense of out-of-state kids. I, too, am interested in the why, as in, "Why do some people wish the entire team were made up of MN kids, and that the entire coaching staff were alumni?"

You can argue a "why?" as to the rankings of kids, but in terms of the numbers of kids playing (on scholly) in D-IA schools across the country, it's a pretty black-and-white numbers game. Not too much open for interpretation there.
 



this board was a downer when we lost lewan, richardson and paige

all outside of the state of minnesota

this board was ecstatic when we got michael carter

who wants it all in state.......i've been posting here quite a while and totally missed it
 

MN is extremely provicincial

Minnesotans are a tough breed.
They hibernate for 6 mos. and only add to the "friend circle' when one of them moves away. I don't complain tho...the MN chicks are awesome looking!
 

dpodoll68 said:
I'm not posting this to be a smart-aleck, or with any kind of hidden agenda. I honestly want to know what people are thinking. Whenever I hear Barreiro start talking about the "one of us" phenomenon, I usually roll my eyes and switch the dial. But after reading this message board for several years, I think he may be on to something. Whenever a coaching vacancy opens up, somebody inevitably says "Hire [insert Gopher alum here] immediately!!!!1!!!11!!" Likewise, if we have an open scholly or two, the refrain is always, "Give [local kid X] a shot, he's just not well-known, he'll really blow up if given a chance."

What is the obsession with keeping things local? I personally would rather have the best players and coaches available, regardless of where they went to school. Can anybody honestly give me a rationale as to why this is a constant refrain here? I can totally understand giving a local kid a shot as a walk-on, and lots of NFL players past and present got their start that way. But it seems to me to be utter nonsense to sign a coach or player if you're competing against yourself.
Click to expand...


would you site some examples please

and would you also give any reason possible that you listen to barreiro......he's the biggest azzhole on KFAN
 

dpodoll68 said:
"Why do some people wish the entire team were made up of MN kids, and that the entire coaching staff were alumni?"
Click to expand...

I think that is only Loon and Wren who have ever expressed that opinion, and neither one ever (supposedly) posts here anymore.
 



Goldteam said:
would you site some examples please
Click to expand...

I have neither the time nor the inclination to conduct a more exhaustive study, but a cursory glance at threads discussed within the last few weeks include:

Draft Terrell Sinkfield
Cole Jirik Commits
Ron Johnson??
Fritz Rock
Small town kids
curtis james?

A common theme among all of these is lamenting the fact that we haven't signed this kid, he chose to go someplace else, or let's hire this guy because he's an alumnus. Not to mention the incessant "Hohensee!!!!!1!1!!" shouts while the OC search was ongoing.

Look, I don't think we should ignore Minnesota; far from it. Rather, we should be focusing on the top 10-15 guys, and offering the guys who aren't getting high D-IA offers the chance to walk on. Under no circumstances should a guy be offered just because he's from here. For every Marion Barber you give me, I can give you dozens who should've never even been offered a scholly. Granted, because Mason was a lazy recruiter, it's not like those kids were taking up the spot of an out-of-state guy who would've been better. But that's certainly not the case with Brewster.

Also, whether or not a prospective coach is an alumnus should be about #30 on the list of qualifications for hire. I liked the thought of Dungy as HC; not because he is an alumnus, but because he's one of the best coaches walking the planet. Conversely, any pipe dreams of Hohensee and/or Johnson now, or ever, coaching on this staff are so absurd that they're barely worth the keyboard they're typed on.

Goldteam said:
and would you also give any reason possible that you listen to barreiro......he's the biggest azzhole on KFAN
Click to expand...

I rarely listen to him (maybe once a week at most). I usually will flip over during the drive home from work when there's nothing good on any of the music stations and listen to what he's ranting about on that particular day. I agree, he's a huge prick and is ridiculously wrong-headed on many of his stances. One thing I will give him, however, is that he's probably the most polished and professional media person (print, radio, or TV) in the Twin Cities.
 

"and would you also give any reason possible that you listen to barreiro......he's the biggest azzhole on KFAN "

You got that right. Oh, and Barreiro's fixation on Minnesota's "one of us" is just plain nonsensical. Read the LA Times, or Chicago Tribune. Listen to WFAN or read any of the NY papers and they have exactly the same stance! Anybody who lived in their area is not only dying to come back, but they want them back. If you played for "West Covina", "Brother Rice High School" or graduated from Rutgers they want you back.

Smaller cities like Las Vegas, Milwaukee or the Twin Cities; there is some logic there. They have trouble getting players or coaches to sign so you can make a case for somone having local ties maybe staying longer or signing for less money.

Big city "guys"? Did Elton Brand really go to Philly because he's an "East Coast" guy? Would Schnellenberger have really turned -down an SEC or a Big Ten school because he lived in Miami? I still remember the LA Times always refering to Tom Brunansky as "West Covina's" Tom Brunansky.

Give me a break .......
 

I think the Minn kids are hugely underrated. I'd take a two star minn kid over a two star out of stater anyday. I think it's a huge advantage for brewster if he can get a good walk on program started for just that reason.

I'm always proud of Minnesotat kids who do well. Because, I'm a minnesotan. And if i can help them succeed by drawing more attention to them, all the better. I love the gophers because they're in Minnesota, and they're a team comprised entirely of Minnesotans.

(once they gain admissions they instantly become Minnesotan. Lucky them.)
 

dpodoll68 said:
I have neither the time nor the inclination to conduct a more exhaustive study, but a cursory glance at threads discussed within the last few weeks include:

Draft Terrell Sinkfield
Cole Jirik Commits
Ron Johnson??
Fritz Rock
Small town kids
curtis james?

A common theme among all of these is lamenting the fact that we haven't signed this kid, he chose to go someplace else, or let's hire this guy because he's an alumnus. Not to mention the incessant "Hohensee!!!!!1!1!!" shouts while the OC search was ongoing.

Look, I don't think we should ignore Minnesota; far from it. Rather, we should be focusing on the top 10-15 guys, and offering the guys who aren't getting high D-IA offers the chance to walk on. Under no circumstances should a guy be offered just because he's from here. For every Marion Barber you give me, I can give you dozens who should've never even been offered a scholly. Granted, because Mason was a lazy recruiter, it's not like those kids were taking up the spot of an out-of-state guy who would've been better. But that's certainly not the case with Brewster.

Also, whether or not a prospective coach is an alumnus should be about #30 on the list of qualifications for hire. I liked the thought of Dungy as HC; not because he is an alumnus, but because he's one of the best coaches walking the planet. Conversely, any pipe dreams of Hohensee and/or Johnson now, or ever, coaching on this staff are so absurd that they're barely worth the keyboard they're typed on.



I rarely listen to him (maybe once a week at most). I usually will flip over during the drive home from work when there's nothing good on any of the music stations and listen to what he's ranting about on that particular day. I agree, he's a huge prick and is ridiculously wrong-headed on many of his stances. One thing I will give him, however, is that he's probably the most polished and professional media person (print, radio, or TV) in the Twin Cities.
Click to expand...

Most on this board are from Minnesota so we're interested in where MN kids go. I haven't heard too many people say that we really should sign Fritz Rock or Sinkfield. A few have stated that but it's not like the majority of people have said that or anything.

As others have said, I think a lot of it has to do with the "hometown pride." MN does not have a lot of kids going to major schools. MN has only one major university. I lived in North Carolina for 4 years and it wasn't nearly as big of a deal because there are a bunch of local kids going to big schools in football, basketball, and baseball.

One reason why Joe Mauer is so big in MN is because "he's one of us" and there aren't that many from MN playing at that high of a level.
 

Schnoodler said:
I think the Minn kids are hugely underrated. I'd take a two star minn kid over a two star out of stater anyday. I think it's a huge advantage for brewster if he can get a good walk on program started for just that reason.

I'm always proud of Minnesotat kids who do well. Because, I'm a minnesotan. And if i can help them succeed by drawing more attention to them, all the better. I love the gophers because they're in Minnesota, and they're a team comprised entirely of Minnesotans.

(once they gain admissions they instantly become Minnesotan. Lucky them.)
Click to expand...

agree 100%.

the ranking sites are notoriously skewed towards the south, texas and california. if rivals or scout gives a minnesota kid a four or five star ranking they will have dozens of coaches, parents and players from the "high school football-playing" regions questioning how some kid playing against lesser talent gets a five star ranking.

of course next years class is a notable exception. it is going to be the most recruited class to come out of minnesota ever. with the hoopla around seantrel the others--gjere, allen et al., will get many more looks.
 

Lets not be delusional. The caliber of football played in southern states and most others is far above MN quality. Most years the best team in MN wouldn't even be a top 5 team in even 2nd tier talent states like Alabama and Missouri. Thats just the truth. Year in and out we have about 7-8 legit D1 guys, some of them top level 4 and 5 star guys, but you're delusional if you think MN players are really underrated. How many MN kids have gone onto have real success elsewhere? There are maybe 5-6 per class. Thats not a lot.
 

The only point I would bring to the table is that if you are doing a good job locally it may well instill in the minds of top recruits from outside the state that "the good guys" from the home state deem the program as worthy of attending. What message does it send to top-ranked guys from other states when the good players from the university's home state don't want to go there?

Plus, getting the top guys in-state should show a strong relationship between the state university and the high school coaching establishment. That's very important in my estimation.

So, while I don't think it should reach obsession levels, it is a goal worth pursuing.
 

There's a logic problem happening in this thread. When looking at quantity of quality athletes, the south kicks our ass. That's one point in this thread, and correctly stated. But in no way does that equate to when two kids are ranked the same that the southern kid is better. i believe that's a fallacy, this is the inferred component to this thread that is flat out wrong. It's my belief that the minnesota kid is likely the better athlete because I believe our rankings to be depressed while the south is inflated by virtue of ill logic as I've already illuminated. From that perspective we should be looking closely at our kids once the top talent is exhausted for that diamond in the rough. That makes the love for our 2* instate recruits about more than just homerism (which should be enough).

In fact I'd prefer a Minnesota 2* over a southern low 3*. but that's just me, and will not argue against the opposite opinion.
 

Actually SI'd argue the opposite. In general terms, southern kids face tougher competition. That makes it harder for a kid to stand out enough to be noticed as a D1 prospect. A 2 star RB in Houston is good enough to garner some attention in an area of tough competition, even though his rating isn't high.
The comp in MN is weak compared to other states. This means that a kid with D1 potential should stand out much more than he would in an area of higher competition. A 2 star kid in MN is a kid that is good enough to possibly play D1 but doesn't dominate weak competition enough to garner a higher ranking.
As I said these are general terms, and I do agree that at times MN talent can be underratted. Still we all love to point out guys like Decker etc who were 2 star recruits but there are tons of 2 star recruits that succeed from other states as well, many of them have been Gopher's through the years. Truth is for a metro area of about 3 million people we produce a shockingly low number of D1 football recruits. There are tons of factors, true but its still a pretty low number
 

It's funny how the same set of data can lead to two seperate conclusions. Well thought out, I disagree, but respectfully so.
 

I don't think there's any doubt that the South, Ohio, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and California produce more talent than Minnesota.

The idea that Minnesota ranks around 40th (!) in the number of legitimate D1 athletes it produces is ridiculous.

Delaware, Maine, New Hampshire, Connecticut, Alaska, Hawaii, Iowa, Wyoming, Montana, South Dakota, North Dakota, Nebraska, Utah, New Mexico, Kansas, Nevada.

That's 16 with no effort whatsoever.

Then you have Colorado, Wisconsin, Arizona, Indiana, Kentucky, West Virginia, Washington and Oregon that all would fall in the same range as Minnesota.

So how often would Minnesota ever be worse than 30th?
 

dpodoll68 said:
By a statistical analysis of any measure, you are just plain wrong. Minnesota compares favorably to, for example, the Dakotas, Montana, Wyoming, etc., but it would rank about 40th (at best) in the number of legitimate, scholarship, D-IA players it turns out on an annual basis.
Click to expand...

What specific measure of statistical analysis did you do to prove that? Because I've attached a link of some research that shows over the past five recruiting seasons that Minnesota ranks 28th in total football scholarships and 33rd in per capita scholarships. Certainly not great, but better than your contending.


http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/football/ncaa/01/21/bcsrecruits.state/
 

And, to answer your original question about "local obsession" - it is not a unique situation to Minnesotans. All Barriero has to do is pick up a newspaper from just about every market to find out about how their native did on the PGA tour this week, or how the guy who went to the local college is playing in the NFL, or how the local high school pitcher is doing in the minor leagues, or how the US ambassador to Ecuador once ate at the local cafe.

That's Barriero, though. Create some sort of mini-crisis out of nothing, beat it to death like he's breaking new ground in talk radio history, sound outraged about it in his whiney voice as to add emphasis, and voila...you've got a show that somehow gets big ratings.
 

The state of Florida had 64, 4 and 5 star football this past year

what did minnesota have?
 

The biggest disadvantage that Minnesota has is the limits that the MSHL places on sports during the off season.

It's not that Minnesota doesn't produce great athletes, it's that their skill set is not as developed as states with spring practice.
 

Ski U Mah Gopher said:
The biggest disadvantage that Minnesota has is the limits that the MSHL places on sports during the off season.

It's not that Minnesota doesn't produce great athletes, it's that their skill set is not as developed as states with spring practice.
Click to expand...

And, there are probably another 10-12+ athletes per year who get hockey scholarships that could have gotten football scholarships if they had either concentrated on football instead of hockey, or - in some cases like Mark Alt, Anders Lee - just chosen football. Some other states like Kentucky or Indiana - where there is little to no hockey - have a small advantage in total numbers over Minnesota, even though Minnesota produces far more overall D-I athletes when you consider the 40+ hockey players per year that get D-I scholarships. Minnesota is like the Florida or Texas of hockey recruiting.
 

nobody said that minnesota produces the AMOUNT of talent as the football rich regions, just that minnesota HS football players are notoriously under-rated.

i'm all for recruiting out of staters, but as schnoodler has stated before we are going to miss out on quite a few diamonds in the rough because the recruiting sites don't get as good of looks at the instate talent. our best player last year was a two star prospect out of a central minnesota town known more for baseball than football. does anyone really think that decker would be a gopher right now had brewster been at the helm in 2004-2005?
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom