WR Rashod Bateman commits

Donate To GopherHole

I think what Spoofin is getting at is this:

The new Gopher recruits may rank higher than the former recruits - but it is more of an incremental improvement.

There is the rational argument (the new recruits rank higher), and there is the symbolic argument. If you are not a hard-core recruitnik, it still comes down to "the new 3-star recruits are better than the old 3-star recruits," which is a lot tougher argument to make.

Like it or not, the Gophers are going to have to land at least one (and hopefully more) 4-star recruits in order for the casual fan to believe that Fleck is making a significant difference in recruiting.

It'l like a track man who improves his PR in the long jump by 1 inch. it's an improvement, but it doesn't sound all that impressive. On the other hand, if he improves his PR by a foot, that sounds a lot more impressive.
 


short ornery norwegian said:
I think what Spoofin is getting at is this:

The new Gopher recruits may rank higher than the former recruits - but it is more of an incremental improvement.

There is the rational argument (the new recruits rank higher), and there is the symbolic argument. If you are not a hard-core recruitnik, it still comes down to "the new 3-star recruits are better than the old 3-star recruits," which is a lot tougher argument to make.

Like it or not, the Gophers are going to have to land at least one (and hopefully more) 4-star recruits in order for the casual fan to believe that Fleck is making a significant difference in recruiting.

It'l like a track man who improves his PR in the long jump by 1 inch. it's an improvement, but it doesn't sound all that impressive. On the other hand, if he improves his PR by a foot, that sounds a lot more impressive.
Click to expand...

It's the middle of June. Official visits haven't started yet and there's 7.5 months left to go before signing day. (6 months until the new early signing period)

Even in Kill/Claeys best class - 2016, they only had 5 commitments at this point. They were all from MN and included Coughlin and Barber.
 

As much as I hated to see the Kill/Claeys era end, Fleck has certainly raised the bar in our ability to recruit. His style is appealing to an impressionable young recruit, he believes in himself, his staff and Minnesota. Every recruit at this point is a 3 star, I can't remember the last time that happened! Mix in a few 4 stars, (if not this year, certainly next) and Minnesota is about to see a return to Gopher football that will rival only the seasons we have read about in history books.

The best is yet to come for Fleck and company, I am officially ready for the ride.
 


short ornery norwegian said:
I think what Spoofin is getting at is this:

The new Gopher recruits may rank higher than the former recruits - but it is more of an incremental improvement.

There is the rational argument (the new recruits rank higher), and there is the symbolic argument. If you are not a hard-core recruitnik, it still comes down to "the new 3-star recruits are better than the old 3-star recruits," which is a lot tougher argument to make.

Like it or not, the Gophers are going to have to land at least one (and hopefully more) 4-star recruits in order for the casual fan to believe that Fleck is making a significant difference in recruiting.

It'l like a track man who improves his PR in the long jump by 1 inch. it's an improvement, but it doesn't sound all that impressive. On the other hand, if he improves his PR by a foot, that sounds a lot more impressive.
Click to expand...

Not all 3-stars are the same. There is a wide discrepancy between high-level and low-level 3-stars, and this is reflected particularly in Rivals' and 247's ratings. Do you really not know that, or are you just trolling?
 

IMHO, we have some very solid high 3* commits. To be a 4* in 247Sports, you have to be rated at 0.8901.

Elijah Teague 0.8681
Brennan Armstrong 0.8616
Terell Smith 0.8616

Some of these guys may be elevated before NSD. Bottom line line is, regardless of whether we actually get 4* recruits or not this is one of the best solid recruiting class that we've seen in years.
 

GopherWeatherGuy said:
It's the middle of June. Official visits haven't started yet and there's 7.5 months left to go before signing day. (6 months until the new early signing period)

Even in Kill/Claeys best class - 2016, they only had 5 commitments at this point. They were all from MN and included Coughlin and Barber.
Click to expand...

I have been hoping that having all these recruits earlier than we did in the past and that boosting our recruiting ranking for the time being would help bring in higher level recruits as the year goes on. Say it's any time from May to maybe October. They can tell kids "Join our class and you'll be joining the 14th (or whatever) rated class in the country!". Whereas in previous years we would have maybe 4 recruits by this time, which I think might make a more difficult sell to recruits. They might be afraid that the class could end up being a dud.
 

dpodoll68 said:
Not all 3-stars are the same. There is a wide discrepancy between high-level and low-level 3-stars, and this is reflected particularly in Rivals' and 247's ratings. Do you really not know that, or are you just trolling?
Click to expand...

I won't speak for SON, but for myself. I am well aware that some 3-star recruits are <I>rated </I>higher than other 3-star recruits - but I think those ratings are worth what I paid to see them. I wouldn't challenge a 5-star has a better chance to succeed at a high level than a 3-star, but to pretend a .8605 recruit has a better chance than a .8600 or even a .8500 is like saying red is more likely to hit in roulette because black hit last time, or that a class ranked 40 is any different than one ranked 35, or that happiness is different than joy.

I also know some don't agree with that, but I don't agree with them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 



This isn't the right forum for what I posted before. Welcome aboard Rashod.
 

SKOOKM said:
Also, the previous coaches actually seemed very good at finding 2 and 3 star players that ended up being very good. The level of play on the field always exceeded what would have been anticipated bases on recruiting class rankings. So if the recruiting rankings average out to about the same under Fleck we better hope that he and his staff are just as good at evaluating talent.
Click to expand...

Exactly my point. I put 1000-times more confidence in a coaches evaluation and which 3-star he thinks is better than what any recruiting service says. I want anyone the coaches want to be a Gopher and that want to be a Gopher on this team. Breaking down "high" and "low" 3-star players is silly. IMO, of course.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

dpodoll68 said:
Not all 3-stars are the same. There is a wide discrepancy between high-level and low-level 3-stars, and this is reflected particularly in Rivals' and 247's ratings. Do you really not know that, or are you just trolling?
Click to expand...

He trolling, no one can be that stupid.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

Spoofin said:
I won't speak for SON, but for myself. I am well aware that some 3-star recruits are <I>rated </I>higher than other 3-star recruits - but I think those ratings are worth what I paid to see them. I wouldn't challenge a 5-star has a better chance to succeed at a high level than a 3-star, but to pretend a .8605 recruit has a better chance than a .8600 or even a .8500 is like saying red is more likely to hit in roulette because black hit last time, or that a class ranked 40 is any different than one ranked 35, or that happiness is different than joy.

I also know some don't agree with that, but I don't agree with them.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I 100% agree with your statements and have been criticized for espousing similar sentiments. I think you are correct on any given recruit, but over time having a pool of slightly higher recruits should result in slightly higher caliber athletes in the program. Of course, that neglects the 'coaching' aspect and we will see what kind of chops this staff possess over time.

Someone earlier mentioned that the casual fan won't care unless we get some 4-stars. I would argue that the casual fan doesn't follow recruiting and will only respect our recruits if they start winning. I doubt the 'casual fan' even knows who Hayo Carpenter is.
 



dpodoll68 said:
Not all 3-stars are the same. There is a wide discrepancy between high-level and low-level 3-stars, and this is reflected particularly in Rivals' and 247's ratings. Do you really not know that, or are you just trolling?
Click to expand...

Jiminy Christmas - READING COMPREHENSION. Read my post: "If you are not a hard-core recruitnik" "in order for the casual fan to believe"

But, since that post was too erudite for you - here you go:

Some people follow the game more than others.

People who don't follow the game closely don't know the difference between a high 3-star and a low 3-star.

People who don't follow the game closely do understand that a 4-star player is better than a 3-star player.

So, in order for casual fans - people who DON'T follow the game closely - to believe that recruiting has improved, the Gophers need to land some 4-star recruits.

I was presenting the case of what it would take to convince people who don't post incessantly on a message board - casual fans. The kind of fans that the Gopher FB program needs to win back. I was not arguing for myself. If I was, I would have phrased the post very differently.

But, I accomplished one thing. I allowed you to feel superior to someone else. Good for you.
 

dpodoll68 said:
Not all 3-stars are the same. There is a wide discrepancy between high-level and low-level 3-stars, and this is reflected particularly in Rivals' and 247's ratings. Do you really not know that, or are you just trolling?
Click to expand...

Are you seriously accusing short of trolling? We're all diehards but his argument of the casual fans perspective that doesn't look at recruiting sites and just reads the strib is a valid one. They're not going to know or care to know the difference in three stars.
 

short ornery norwegian said:
Jiminy Christmas - READING COMPREHENSION. Read my post: "If you are not a hard-core recruitnik" "in order for the casual fan to believe"

But, since that post was too erudite for you - here you go:

Some people follow the game more than others.

People who don't follow the game closely don't know the difference between a high 3-star and a low 3-star.

People who don't follow the game closely do understand that a 4-star player is better than a 3-star player.

So, in order for casual fans - people who DON'T follow the game closely - to believe that recruiting has improved, the Gophers need to land some 4-star recruits.

I was presenting the case of what it would take to convince people who don't post incessantly on a message board - casual fans. The kind of fans that the Gopher FB program needs to win back. I was not arguing for myself. If I was, I would have phrased the post very differently.

But, I accomplished one thing. I allowed you to feel superior to someone else. Good for you.
Click to expand...

Why am I or is anyone else supposed to care about someone's opinion on a topic that they don't follow or care about? Much like no one should or would care about my opinion on Russian ballet dancers, no one should care about the opinion of some random person who hasn't taken the time to educate themselves on how recruiting works. Why does their opinion matter? Why should I or anyone else care what they think?
 

Spoofin said:
I won't speak for SON, but for myself. I am well aware that some 3-star recruits are <I>rated </I>higher than other 3-star recruits - but I think those ratings are worth what I paid to see them. I wouldn't challenge a 5-star has a better chance to succeed at a high level than a 3-star, but to pretend a .8605 recruit has a better chance than a .8600 or even a .8500 is like saying red is more likely to hit in roulette because black hit last time, or that a class ranked 40 is any different than one ranked 35, or that happiness is different than joy.

I also know some don't agree with that, but I don't agree with them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

When you pick out single data points and try to hold them up as evidence of something, sure. When you look at the aggregate, it's basic fact, proven time and again - unless you want to argue against math.
 

dpodoll68 said:
Why am I or is anyone else supposed to care about someone's opinion on a topic that they don't follow or care about? Much like no one should or would care about my opinion on Russian ballet dancers, no one should care about the opinion of some random person who hasn't taken the time to educate themselves on how recruiting works. Why does their opinion matter? Why should I or anyone else care what they think?
Click to expand...

OK. now I get it. College FB is a cult. only certain people with inside information are allowed to follow the sport or have an opinion. By your standards, I should not be on this board. I should not even be allowed to discuss college FB, because I don't care about it as much as you do, and you are the arbiter of who gets to call themselves a fan.

Jeez, Dp. I have defended you in the past, but there are times when you are so bleeping self-righteous that I just don't get it.

Have fun wallowing in your narcissistic hell.

Oh, and by the way - those rankings that you put so much stock in. Do those come straight down from heaven? No, they're assigned by a human being. Who is presumably flawed and fallible, like all human beings. Except for you.
 

short ornery norwegian said:
So, in order for casual fans - people who DON'T follow the game closely - to believe that recruiting has improved, the Gophers need to land some 4-star recruits.
Click to expand...

So casual fans are too stupid to realize that finishing 40th would be better than finishing 46th, for example? That's what really matters to most people. If they finish 45th or better, that's an improvement. You don't have to be a recruiting expert to understand that.
 

Casual fans don't care about the ranking of a class. They only care about results on the field and the bandwagon. Serious fans look at signees and maybe know what Rivals or S&P+ is. Diehards brood or have a bad day or kick their dog after every decommit. The insane know the difference between joyfulness and happiness.

The 3.5 million dollar question is if Fleck and his staff can get better, equivalent, or worse results from players ranked 40th in projected talent. He beat a few teams he shouldn't have at WMU so that's promising. Of concern is I've read here he had substantially more talented and highly rated teams than his fellow MAC competitors making it far easier to win. That won't be the case in the Big Ten. If he cannot reel in top 25 or 30 classes right away he will need to coach em up, out scheme and outfox if we want to get where want to go (Pasadena). The exciting part is if he does have some immediate level of success, say 8-10 wins that will springboard recruiting big time IMO.
 

joshvanklomp said:
So casual fans are too stupid to realize that finishing 40th would be better than finishing 46th, for example? That's what really matters to most people. If they finish 45th or better, that's an improvement. You don't have to be a recruiting expert to understand that.
Click to expand...

I'm not a casual fan. I also realize the difference between 40th and 46th ranked classes is absolutely nothing. I would argue you would have to be a casual fan to think there is a difference.

Each player in those 2 classes would have been ranked by someone who is less knowledgeable than the coaches on what they need for their team and system. Less knowledgeable than the coaches, period. The rankings are weighted for quantity as much as quality. You could literally flip a coin (or let my dog pick) and be equally likely to predict which of those classes in your scenario will be more successful.

People like things black/white, so go on thinking if we get to 45 that means our class will be better than 46. Go on thinking the class ranked 40th must be better than the 46th. You and the casual fans can think it proves something, but it doesn't. So many examples out there, but I'm sure they are just outliers.

Funny that "high" 3 versus "low" 3 discussions on here didn't start until PJ was coach. No one was asking for "high" 3s when he started. Look, we all realize he is likely a better recruiter, but the level being looked at now to try and "prove" it is silly and unnecessary.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

It is a internet chat forum. It is suppose to make sense.
 

Spoofin said:
People like things black/white, so go on thinking if we get to 45 that means our class will be better than 46. Go on thinking the class ranked 40th must be better than the 46th. You and the casual fans can think it proves something, but it doesn't. So many examples out there, but I'm sure they are just outliers.
Click to expand...

Is the 45th-ranked class higher-ranked than the 46th-ranked class, yes or no?
 

joshvanklomp said:
Is the 45th-ranked class higher-ranked than the 46th-ranked class, yes or no?
Click to expand...

Of course, but my point is 50/50 which is better - which is where we differ in opinion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Spoofin said:
Of course, but my point is 50/50 which is better - which is where we differ in opinion.
Click to expand...

Well sure, nobody knows for 100% certain if a certain player is better than another. But I do think the casual fans look at if we end up with the 45th-ranked class or the 50th, one is perceived to be better than the other. The diehards know that may or may not matter, but I think casuals just look at where the class ranks on Signing Day and don't try to psycho-analyze it like others do.
 


joshvanklomp said:
Well sure, nobody knows for 100% certain if a certain player is better than another. But I do think the casual fans look at if we end up with the 45th-ranked class or the 50th, one is perceived to be better than the other. The diehards know that may or may not matter, but I think casuals just look at where the class ranks on Signing Day and don't try to psycho-analyze it like others do.
Click to expand...

Casual fans don't follow recruiting at all.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

short ornery norwegian said:
OK. now I get it. College FB is a cult. only certain people with inside information are allowed to follow the sport or have an opinion. By your standards, I should not be on this board. I should not even be allowed to discuss college FB, because I don't care about it as much as you do, and you are the arbiter of who gets to call themselves a fan.

Jeez, Dp. I have defended you in the past, but there are times when you are so bleeping self-righteous that I just don't get it.

Have fun wallowing in your narcissistic hell.

Oh, and by the way - those rankings that you put so much stock in. Do those come straight down from heaven? No, they're assigned by a human being. Who is presumably flawed and fallible, like all human beings. Except for you.
Click to expand...

Calm down and cut it out with the martyr complex. I don't care about a physician's opinion on law. I don't care about an attorney's opinion on my car's engine. I don't care about a mechanic's opinion on medicine. Yet you state that I'm supposed to care about the recruiting opinion of a casual fan who doesn't care about recruiting or follow it. But why? Why should I care about the opinion of a person who has zero expertise on a subject? I'm sure that my 5-year-old daughter would express an opinion on the state of Gophers football recruiting if I asked her. I don't ask her for her opinion because I don't care what her feelings are on the topic - she has zero interest in or expertise on the subject.
 

Spoofin said:
Funny that "high" 3 versus "low" 3 discussions on here didn't start until PJ was coach. No one was asking for "high" 3s when he started. Look, we all realize he is likely a better recruiter, but the level being looked at now to try and "prove" it is silly and unnecessary.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

More lies
 

Spoofin said:
I'm not a casual fan. I also realize the difference between 40th and 46th ranked classes is absolutely nothing. I would argue you would have to be a casual fan to think there is a difference.
Click to expand...


Hell I'd argue at times 30 to 50 ... 50+ even can be a wash.

I'll be happy if we move up, but gotta temper what we think we'll get because of it.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom