ESPN: Potential 2015 Big Ten Cinderellas (Minnesota is a threat to get over hump)

Donate To GopherHole
BleedGopher

BleedGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
60,728
Reaction score
16,037
Points
113
per ESPN:

It’s that time of year when American sports fans inevitably find a new underdog to celebrate. March Madness has a steady history of producing upsets and unexpected runs because of the nature of the tournament. In college football it’s much tougher to dethrone the powers that be, but there are a couple teams that have the potential to play a Cinderella role in the Big Ten next fall.

Minnesota

Minnesota, with facilities that qualify as a hollowed-out pumpkin when compared to some of its competition, has strung together consecutive eight-win seasons. The Gophers are a threat to get over the hump in the West Division because of their ability to keep games close.

Quarterback Mitch Leidner returns with an offense that needs to find new playmakers. If the Gophers can find another workhorse at running back, they should be able to continue to shorten games and keep up with more talented opponents -- like they did in a seven-point loss to Ohio State last November. Leidner needs to improve the passing attack to give the offense a chance to make big plays and pull out those types of upsets late in the game.

The teams to beat in the West -- Nebraska and Wisconsin -- both have new coaching staffs this season, which opens a window for the Gophers. Midnight might come for this group in October, when they have to face the Cornhuskers, Michigan and Ohio State in three straight games.

http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/116968/potential-2015-big-ten-cinderellas

Go Gophers!!
 

Nebraska a team to beat in the West but not Minnesota? Sound logic. We have beat the Huskers 2 years in a row and Nebraska is 1-4 against Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Iowa the past 2 seasons. They lost Abdullah, Gregory, and Bell among others, as well as having a brand new coaching staff. But hey, Minnesota is everyone's favorite "little engine that could" team.
 



Teams don't like to play us any more. We are not as talented as a lot of teams but we show up every Saturday.
 


It will be interesting to see if just having Harbaugh on the sidelines makes Michigan that much better, or if Michigan will be in full rebuilding mode this season and be vulnerable to lose in any of their B1G match ups. I like our chances at home if we can start the season strong and keep progressing.

In fact, I like our chances at home with Nebraska, Michigan and Wisconsin. I think we were close to getting over the hump against UW. Our Achilles heel in that game was our slow and methodical offense. We took so few risks that we really needed perfect execution in order to stay ahead. One fumble and everything started to unwind, and our defense eventually couldn't keep UW in check.
 

Gopherdrummer said:
It will be interesting to see if just having Harbaugh on the sidelines makes Michigan that much better, or if Michigan will be in full rebuilding mode this season and be vulnerable to lose in any of their B1G match ups. I like our chances at home if we can start the season strong and keep progressing.

In fact, I like our chances at home with Nebraska, Michigan and Wisconsin. I think we were close to getting over the hump against UW. Our Achilles heel in that game was our slow and methodical offense. We took so few risks that we really needed perfect execution in order to stay ahead. One fumble and everything started to unwind, and our defense eventually couldn't keep UW

I believe if we can be 4-1 or even 3-2 in BIG play, and then beat the underdog Hawkeyes, that game will be a defining moment of the year and will eventually have us playing the Buckeyes again.
Click to expand...
 

gophmeister said:
Teams don't like to play us any more. We are not as talented as a lot of teams but we show up every Saturday.
Click to expand...

BULL EFFIN SH!T. I hate that narrative. It is simply not true. We are that talented. Our players just develop after high school.
 

t-docious said:
BULL EFFIN SH!T. I hate that narrative. It is simply not true. We are that talented. Our players just develop after high school.
Click to expand...

+1.... I think we are getting great players because of our style is not in vogue. Most teams play the spread. The spread requires different types of players than our style offense. Given most teams play the spread, recruiting rankings, rate their players based on this premise (supply and demand model) that the most prized, and thus four and five star players, are more likely to have skill sets matching spread offenses. We use a contrarian system. So Our players appear underrated. moreover, people are naturally compelled to anchor to those ratings. Even though they are rating for a success that does not match what we need them to do. They don't fit well with most programs. thus, even given our players awesome fit into "a" system, they would not excel as greatly in spread systems. Thus, they have less demand, and we reap the rewards.
 



A lot of people get the mindset that we aren't as talented because of our recruiting rankings. As was stated a lot of our talent doesn't develop until after high school. Unfortunately that narrative is repeated over and over through the media because they are the ones giving the low recruiting grades.
 

atsgopher said:
+1.... I think we are getting great players because of our style is not in vogue. Most teams play the spread. The spread requires different types of players than our style offense. Given most teams play the spread, recruiting rankings, rate their players based on this premise (supply and demand model) that the most prized, and thus four and five star players, are more likely to have skill sets matching spread offenses. We use a contrarian system. So Our players appear underrated. moreover, people are naturally compelled to anchor to those ratings. Even though they are rating for a success that does not match what we need them to do. They don't fit well with most programs. thus, even given our players awesome fit into "a" system, they would not excel as greatly in spread systems. Thus, they have less demand, and we reap the rewards.
Click to expand...

Well stated
 

IAGopherfan said:
A lot of people get the mindset that we aren't as talented because of our recruiting rankings. As was stated a lot of our talent doesn't develop until after high school. Unfortunately that narrative is repeated over and over through the media because they are the ones giving the low recruiting grades.
Click to expand...

Kind of like Wisconsin basketball?
 

If we go 5-3 every season from here to eternity, they'll bury me with perma-grin.
 




Studwell55 said:
If we go 5-3 every season from here to eternity, they'll bury me with perma-grin.
Click to expand...

Count me in with GHoler. Couple that 5-3 in the B1G with 4 non-conference wins and that's a great baseline.

Grinnin' Glen move over!
 

station19 said:
Kind of like Wisconsin basketball?
Click to expand...

Wisconsin does pretty well in basketball recruiting rankings. Dekker, Koenig, and Hayes were all pretty high profile recruits. Obviously Kaminsky was an underrated late bloomer though.
 

It's funny because the untalented team he's referring to will have at least 5 major contributors/upperclassmen drafted into the NFL between Maxx, BBC, Murray, Thompson, and Cobb. I don't think Wilson gets drafted, but he was 1st team all-conference so it's not like he was lacking in talent at the college level.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom