Recruiting talent level better in PJ Fleck era: Will fuel future Gophers' success

Outlier.

So, given that we’re not recruiting at that clip...what now? Roll over and suck our thumbs? Make excuses till the cows come home? Or find a way to win?

I dunno, recruit better? Don't keep saying stars don't matter while wondering why we aren't winning. We could get a good coach and program in place and start finishing top 25 more often like Wisconsin and Okie St, but that still requires good classes just outside the top 25.
 

UW has consistently done it over 25 years and the reason is great coaches and great scouting. They have hired great coaches twice in that span and the U has failed on every hire including Kill. They proved they could not win big. Now it is Fleck's turn to see if he is the guy.
 

Would be interesting if a math whiz could create some kind of rating system that wasn’t just an composite average but also weighted quarterbacks heavier and specialists lighter. Could also take into account things like how they filled the depth chart among other things.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

When all is said and done...after the noise of your arguments based upon dissecting star ratings...ranking...merit or lack of merit: the number of Big Ten wins achieved by P J Fleck over the course of his tenure here at Minnesota will answer with precision exactly how well P J was able to compete in the Big Ten Conference with the stars and their rankings of his recruits. It will also factor in his coaching ability. It will tell us how the ball bounced during his time in Minneapolis. We will be able to compare how he did compared to TC, Kill, Brewster, Mason, Wacker, Gutty, Hoax, Salem, Stoll, Murray, Fessler and Bierman, himself.

So, argue it out boys and girls. Call each other names. Insinuate anything you want. Try to prove it with your words. Convince others to join your point of view. Do this all with passion, conviction and strong beliefs. My way takes all the fantasy out of high school multi-star football recruiting at the University of Minnesota and in other spots in the Big Ten Conference. In my method: optimal emphasis is placed on the results of REAL Big Ten Football Games that have actually been played AND completed. I suppose that is rather boring...but: it works.

My way will break it all down into precise percentages and completely rank and rate the effectiveness of guessing how the star ranking system of this era works against the time-tested old method of counting Big Ten wins and contrasting them with Big Ten losses. It can't be valid including ooc games because there is such a variance of relative strength of the southwest, northeast, mountain, little sisters of the poor types of teams the ooc schedule is so notorious for.

In the end, my ranking system will be able to answer all of your star-gazing assumptions and guesses.

True, wins in the Big Ten have been hard to come by, even by Mason and Kill, who went to a lot of bowls.
 

Two years ago only 3 P5 teams made it, UNC, Iowa, and Okie State once again. Three years ago it was Arizona, GT, and Wisconsin. So last three years, it's been 4, 3, and 3. Only 8 programs the last 3 years with Okie st and Wisconsin doing it twice.

Thanks for doing all the legwork, but what polls and years are you looking at? None of the above appears to be true based on the AP polls, but I’ll give you a chance to explain.

2016
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_NCAA_Division_I_FBS_football_rankings

2015
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_NCAA_Division_I_FBS_football_rankings
 


Would be interesting if a math whiz could create [Bsome Kimd of rating system[/B] that wasn’t just an composite average but also weighted quarterbacks heavier and specialists lighter. Could also take into account things like how they filled the depth chart among other things.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Like wins and losses? Advanced stats?

In all seriousness, it might be interesting to look at who proven coaches offer, ie the Meyers, Sabans, Petersons, Pattersons, Swinneys, Fitzgeralds, Sawvels of the world. Those players might have a better chance of actually being talented than their fellow 3,4,5 star players a lesser proven or talented coach might jump on. Maybe asterisk them, or factor in a contribution toward their rating as 247 does.
 

I dunno, recruit better? Don't keep saying stars don't matter while wondering why we aren't winning. We could get a good coach and program in place and start finishing top 25 more often like Wisconsin and Okie St, but that still requires good classes just outside the top 25.

Has there ever been a team that consistently recruits top 25 classes without winning first? Serious question.
 

Thanks for doing all the legwork, but what polls and years are you looking at? None of the above appears to be true based on the AP polls, but I’ll give you a chance to explain.

2016
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_NCAA_Division_I_FBS_football_rankings

2015
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_NCAA_Division_I_FBS_football_rankings

Oh my bad, I was looking at preseason polls for 2016 and 2015. Regardless I'm sure the final polls have similar results. I've looked at this in the past.
 

How to have a winning team:

1. recruit players that are better than your opponents
2. recruit players that are the same as your opponents - and do a better job of coaching
3. recruit players that are worse than your opponents - and do a brilliant job of coaching

All three of these can work under the right circumstances. #1 is probably the surest chance of success - IF you can recruit the players you need. And #3 is probably the hardest to pull off. that's where you see the unique schemes (run-and-shoot, triple-option, etc).

But I would say the majority of teams find themselves trying to pull off #2. Coaching matters. The current Gopher staff has an opportunity to show what they can do. we'll see how it all turns out.
 






So PJ has some work cut out for him. Brohm has scooped his mojo and momentum.

Meh, I just want the gophers to get better, not worry about the bad conference teams staying bad, or hoping the good ones somehow get worse.
 



Meh, I just want the gophers to get better, not worry about the bad conference teams staying bad, or hoping the good ones somehow get worse.

I’m with you. Hoping for signs of life this year and the new talent should really start to make an impact in 2019/2020.
 

How to have a winning team:

1. recruit players that are better than your opponents
2. recruit players that are the same as your opponents - and do a better job of coaching
3. recruit players that are worse than your opponents - and do a brilliant job of coaching

All three of these can work under the right circumstances. #1 is probably the surest chance of success - IF you can recruit the players you need. And #3 is probably the hardest to pull off. that's where you see the unique schemes (run-and-shoot, triple-option, etc).

But I would say the majority of teams find themselves trying to pull off #2. Coaching matters. The current Gopher staff has an opportunity to show what they can do. we'll see how it all turns out.

It's not 'probably'. #1 gives you far and away the best chance to win and it's been proven time and again by simple statistics.
 

How to have a winning team:

1. recruit players that are better than your opponents
2. recruit players that are the same as your opponents - and do a better job of coaching
3. recruit players that are worse than your opponents - and do a brilliant job of coaching

All three of these can work under the right circumstances. #1 is probably the surest chance of success - IF you can recruit the players you need. And #3 is probably the hardest to pull off. that's where you see the unique schemes (run-and-shoot, triple-option, etc).

But I would say the majority of teams find themselves trying to pull off #2. Coaching matters. The current Gopher staff has an opportunity to show what they can do. we'll see how it all turns out.

I'd say there are more than three ways. I've added the three in bold which would also give you a chance to beat opponents.

1. recruit players that are better than your opponents
1b. recruit players that are better than your opponents- and do a better job of coaching
1c. recruit players that are better than your opponents- and do a brilliant job of coaching

2. recruit players that are the same as your opponents - and do a better job of coaching
2b. recruit players that are the same as your opponents - and do a brilliant job of coaching
3. recruit players that are worse than your opponents - and do a brilliant job of coaching


1c then followed by 1b, then followed by 2b would give you the best chances for success.
 

It's not 'probably'. #1 gives you far and away the best chance to win and it's been proven time and again by simple statistics.

Those stats are muddied by the fact the top programs generally have the cream of the crop coaches. You’re essentially arguing against MN ever being able to compete if you’re saying there is little chance of overperforming recruit rankings. PJ has to find a way. I’d prefer than not involve nefarious recruiting methods some programs are accused of employing. Slow and steady rise to the top. Winning creates a positive feedback loop.
 

It's not 'probably'. #1 gives you far and away the best chance to win and it's been proven time and again by simple statistics.

what I thought about saying - but didn't - was that bad coaching could screw up a team with superior talent. But I was worried people would see it as a shot at Fleck, so I left that out.
 

Nice, now we have a tread that can take all this stuff out of the other threads.
It is all very simple and you need to pull out the actual numbers that have been posted on numerous occasions. Only a handful of “potential” studs get five stars and they typically only go to a few school and all but 2-3 schools get only 1 or two of them in a class. The four stars are awarded to just a larger handful of players and they go the the same schools that get the five stars players. The two star players are guys the recruiting services basically know nothing about, or have not had distinguished careers in high school, but schools are looking at them. EVERYONE else that is rated is given three stars. With literally 1,500 players each year it is only logical to assume that they are not all equal. If you can’t get that through your thick skull then there is no hope.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You can agree on one thing- PJ Fleck has gotten pretty decent athletes especially on offense.
 





Top Bottom