2011 Recruiting Question

Donate To GopherHole
S

scher215

Active member
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Messages
6,609
Reaction score
2
Points
38
I am not someone who follows the football program's recruiting too closely or the types of players we get, but was bored today and decided to look at scout.com (i know, not always the most reliable source) and see what, if any, top prospects had interest in the U.

There actually are quite a few, and I was curious if anyone is able to provide any more information about the Gophers actual chances with them? I did notice there were none from the state of MN in the top 200, so I am not sure of our standing with any of these top recruits considering Minnesota.

Anthony Wallace DE / LB 5-star
Kevin Grooms CB 4-star
Jordal Walsh OG 4-star
Dondi Kirby CB 4-star
Justice Hayes RB 4-star
 

If we have a chance with any of these kids it's only because Brew was able to keep them from saying no and we have a surprising season. I would be amazed if we bring in a 4 star this year. No playing time, a coach on a hot seat and no winning program. It's a tough sell.

It's just the reality of the situation. I think you'll continue to see Brew fill this class with "program kids". It's actually a good thing. If the current roster does what they are suppose to and learn how to win this year and then have a decent season next, coach will be able to sell playing time and an improving program, and probable a stable coaching situation. He'll be able to take the talent level up a notch, unlike what Mason did after his good year. If it doesn't happen does it really matter?
 

You can add Jameel Poteat RB to the list of 4 stars interested in the Gophers:)
 

I think Olsen gets moved to 4* once the season gets underway. So we should have at least one 4*.
 





Use the list from FBT as it is much more reliable.

Wallace is a pipedream. I'd be willing to bet on Wallace ending up at OU. I believe Hayes is announcing soon and has a final 3 that does not include Minnesota--I believe the smart money is on Notre Dame. We're not really in the hunt for Walsh either--strong interest in Northwestern, Iowa and a couple others. I'm not sure where Grooms (rumors earlier of strong interest in FSU) or Kirby stands.
 

I can't understand why the Gophs want Moore at this point (besides keeping the Skyline pipeline open). You have 3 LB recruits and 1 swing (Westerhaus TE/LB) already. Not saying he's not a solid prospect but I'd like to see a lot more DB recruits added to this class with how bad our depth is...not another LB/DE (two of our stronger positions for depth and talent).
 



MV Gopher said:
I can't understand why the Gophs want Moore at this point (besides keeping the Skyline pipeline open). You have 3 LB recruits and 1 swing (Westerhaus TE/LB) already. Not saying he's not a solid prospect but I'd like to see a lot more DB recruits added to this class with how bad our depth is...not another LB/DE (two of our stronger positions for depth and talent).
Click to expand...

Nice try D-Bag.
 

MV Gopher said:
I can't understand why the Gophs want Moore at this point (besides keeping the Skyline pipeline open). You have 3 LB recruits and 1 swing (Westerhaus TE/LB) already. Not saying he's not a solid prospect but I'd like to see a lot more DB recruits added to this class with how bad our depth is...not another LB/DE (two of our stronger positions for depth and talent).
Click to expand...

DE is one of our stronger positions for depth? Really?

Quick, name a 3rd string DE.

Fake MV, you need to get better at trolling if you want to pull this off.
 

MV Gopher said:
I can't understand why the Gophs want Moore at this point (besides keeping the Skyline pipeline open). You have 3 LB recruits and 1 swing (Westerhaus TE/LB) already. Not saying he's not a solid prospect but I'd like to see a lot more DB recruits added to this class with how bad our depth is...not another LB/DE (two of our stronger positions for depth and talent).
Click to expand...

Really? You created a profile to assume MV's good name?

Welcome back Panther
 

I'm not "Panther" whoever that is. Nice to be jumped on for joining and making a basic post. As for DE...if you've got guys on scholarship as your 3rd stringers and not walk-ons I think you're doing alright. Depending on if you put Jacobs as a DE or DT you still have 6 guys that are SO or younger at that position so that's depth in my book.

RE
Hageman
Jacobs
Gregory-McGhee
Perry

LE
Wilhite
Garin
Simpson
 



MV Gopher said:
I'm not "Panther" whoever that is. Nice to be jumped on for joining and making a basic post. As for DE...if you've got guys on scholarship as your 3rd stringers and not walk-ons I think you're doing alright. Depending on if you put Jacobs as a DE or DT you still have 6 guys that are SO or younger at that position so that's depth in my book.

RE
Hageman
Jacobs
Gregory-McGhee
Perry

LE
Wilhite
Garin
Simpson
Click to expand...

Jacobs = DT (he may play some DE--particularly in short yardage--but he is a DT)
Hageman will likely eventually be moved inside to DT. You just don't see many 300 lb DE's and that will be his eventual weight (290 already).

That leaves 5 players that are expected to be DE's down the road and two of them have never participated in a practice here. Perry was a late offer that may develop in to something but he had 0 other BCS offers so he is anything but a sure thing. I wouldn't be surprised to see us take 2 DE's in this class but we definitely need to take 1.
 

I hate trolls as much as the next guy, but I think you guys jumped on MV a little quickly. I disagree with his post (I say take as many quality players, especially on defense, that want to come here) but he brought up a very valid point that could be argued. He obviously isn't some sword-wielding, hogeye nerd who probably has a severe case of carpal tunnel thanks to lonely weekend nights with his Ferentz poster.
 

Thanks GopherHomer. I'm not trying to sound like a know it all and I agree with taking quality defenders...I just don't think Moore is much different then the 3 LB's that are committed already to justify him being the 4th LB in this class when our roster has a good amount of solid young LBs already (Cooper, Rallis, Reeves, Singleton, Beal ect.) unless they're going to a 3-4. If he's an elite talent at that spot I'm all for it. Grunkiejr makes some good points on the DL. I wasn't a fan of adding Perry late either and I hope they'll take 1 maybe 2 impact DE's in this class but I still think you're in good shape for depth having 5 scholarship DE's that are SO's or younger.
 

Based on his recruiting tendencies, I think Brewster really wants to have an elite linebacking core. If a logjam is created in the process, so be it. Remember just because guys are rated the same by recruiting sites, does not guarantee they will have the same impact on the field. A certain percentage of "3-star" type recruits end up being stars, and I think Brewster is just trying to increase his odds of landing one of these overacheivers.
 

Linebackers often transition to safety or defensive end. Plus, it may be a way to maintain the Skyline connection. The school produces a lot of solid players.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom