ESPN: Recruiting to Minnesota is tough, but not impossible

Donate To GopherHole
Gopher07

Gopher07

Captain of Awesome
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
9,008
Reaction score
15
Points
38
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/recruiting/football/news/story?id=5699017

Recruiting to Minnesota is always going to be difficult, specifically outside of the Midwest, but it can be done. Tim Brewster proved that, but staff instability and his lack of experience and leadership as a head coach (he was never a coordinator or head coach at the collegiate or professional level before being hired by Minnesota in 2007) caught up with him.

It seemed early on that Brewster's enthusiasm and work ethic was going to pay dividends. Minnesota landed a top-25 recruiting class in 2008, which had prospects from 10 different states including Texas, California and Florida. The Golden Gophers cast the recruiting net out wide and had some success. They were able to keep many of the state's best players home, with the notable exception of five-star OT Seantrel Henderson, who ended up at Miami, and then supplemented the roster with speed from across the country at skill positions. While they didn't have a top-25 class outside of that 23rd-ranked class in 2008, their classes had above-average grades in 2008 and 2009, before slipping to just an average grade in 2010.

This year's class of 15 verbal commitments is deep at linebacker and offensive line and roughly half of Minnesota's class consists of players who can help a team win at the BCS level. There is far more focus on the Midwest, which will allow for quicker and more in-depth evaluation by the new staff, provided all or most of the 15 stick with the program. Still, that seems unlikely given the amount of time between now and February. A big factor will be how quickly Minnesota acts to name a new coach.

Minnesota's administration expects winning seasons and bowl games, fairly or not, because the Gophers tasted it with Glen Mason, and this was before the facilities upgrade and the newly built TCF Bank Stadium were in place. This may be why Minnesota can't afford to take a chance on an unproven coach, or make a risky hire this time around with an unproven commodity. Instead, it will likely rather go after a proven head coach, one who has recruited well and won consistently and, in a perfect world, had success at a place that is tough to get it done. Obviously Mark Mangino and Mike Leach are two coaches who come to mind, but both would be controversial hires by a program that can't afford to miss again.

Maybe it would best serve the administration to hire a coach with a Wisconsin-like mentality, one who brings a tough, hard-nosed philosophy predicated upon success in the run game and building the team from the inside out up front on both sides of the ball. A tireless recruiter is an essential component to any head man leading a program, but also recruiting the right guys for your program and creating an identity is crucial.

Creating continuity and consistency will be key as well. It's hard to win when you have three offensive coordinators in three years. And recruits notice that as well and want to make sure they're going to a program that has coaches who will help them succeed and develop, not one that will be making changes every year. Plus it's hard to develop relationships that are so vital in recruiting if coaches aren't there for more than a year at a time. That kind of turnover makes it that much harder to consistently recruit well, which could be why the Gophers' classes started slipping little by little.

Weather, location and lack of a winning tradition and identity are all difficult factors to contend with for any coach and whoever comes in here will have expectations of success placed on him immediately. But Brewster showed it is possible to recruit well at Minnesota, so that can't be the reason why the Golden Gophers have struggled. The bottom line is if Iowa, Wisconsin, Northwestern and Purdue can consistently win, Minnesota is certainly capable of landing good recruits and being a .500 or above program every year with a few eight- and nine-win seasons sprinkled in.
Click to expand...
 


Well, as much as I hate Wisconsin, if we had the level of success where we win a B10 title 3 times in 17 years, compete well against top competition, and have an identity, then sure I'll let them compare us to them.

I thought it was well-written and played out a lot of what we say on here - recruiting to MN shouldn't be that hard given our academic institution, city, campus, facilities, and history (albeit a little more distant than some). Weather should be a non-factor compared to other teams with very similar weather (WI, IA, MI, MSU). My only problem was the last statement. Above .500 records with 8 and 9 win seasons sprinkled in there. We had that with Mason. reality is an 8 win season is 4-0 in non-conference and 4-4 in the Big Ten (or 3-5 with a bowl win). A 9 win season is 4-0 non-con and 5-3 B10 (or 4-4 B10 with a bowl win). Not acceptable for our goals as a football team, or anyone's for that matter. Maybe as a first step toward getting better or gaining momentum, but not for the long haul. 8-9 win seasons should be the mediocre to disappointing seasons, with a 10-11 win season being the ones sprinkled in. 10 wins COULD be a B10 title (undoubtedly a share), 11 wins would almost guarantee it. If we won 11 games once every 6-7 years I would be happy.
 


Oh yea...it sure would suck to beat a No. 1 team like Ohio State.
 


I think the Sconny stuff gets old because it is seen as THE way to turn around a program. Look at the success at NWestern, it was done in a different way from the Badgers (more of a spread) and even MSU's recent success was built in a different manner than Wisconsin.
 

I think the Wisconsin model is seen as the way because of its durability. Alvarez installed a system that is still working. I think the same can be said of Ferentz in Iowa. If D'Antonio stays at MSU, we may see the same thing there.

I'm not sold on Northwestern in the long haul. Fitzgerald is a great coach and that team plays smart and hard, but can they keep coming up with fullbacks who can pass?
 

Another article from Rittenberg:

http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/18185/minnesota-rebuilding-not-easy-but-doable
It's painful enough to fire your coach only six games into a season, as Minnesota did with Tim Brewster.

But here's what might be more painful: As athletic director Joel Maturi stepped to the podium Sunday in Minneapolis, the party in Madison still raged as Wisconsin celebrated its win against the nation's No. 1 team. And down in Iowa City, the Hawkeyes were welcomed back after scoring the highest points total in team history against Michigan (38) in a win against the Wolverines.

As Minnesota admitted failure Sunday -- and to Maturi's credit, he did so in candid fashion -- its two biggest rivals celebrated their latest successes.

Minnesota received another reminder of where it is, and where it needs to go.

"It only emphasized what I think we can do," Maturi said of Wisconsin's big win Saturday. "I'm proud to say I was at the University of Wisconsin when they were in a similar condition to what we are in. Proud to say I was there when they won their first Rose Bowl, so I know it can be done. I think I have a clue as to how it was done and why it was done, and I'm here to do what I can to have it happen at the University of Minnesota."

Whether or not you believe Maturi can help restore and enhance Minnesota's football program -- many ADs don't get a chance to hire a second football coach -- his reference point is a good one.

After winning the Big Ten in 1962, Wisconsin went 31 years before claiming another title. Minnesota is in a 33-year drought without a championship, tied with Indiana for the longest in the league.

So it can be done, but it's far from a guarantee.

A large portion of Minnesota fans are rejoicing because Brewster is gone. That's their right as fans. But coaching change is never easy, and the really hard part comes next.

The Big Ten gets better in 2011 when Nebraska joins the league. Minnesota will be in a division with Michigan State and Iowa -- currently ranked No. 7 and No. 15 in the BCS standings, respectively -- as well as the aforementioned Huskers, a Northwestern team consistently making bowl games and a Michigan program that will restore itself to powerhouse status at some point.

Oh, and the Gophers still get to face Wisconsin every year in a protected crossover game.

"We're also at a significant time in the history of the Big Ten Conference," Maturi said in his opening remarks Sunday. "There are many exciting changes taking place -- expansion, divisional play, a conference championship football game -- and I believe it's critical that the University of Minnesota be in position to take advantage of those opportunities of those changes."

How prepared is Minnesota to take advantage?

Becoming the first FBS school to dump its coach this season give Minnesota a head start on looking for a successor.

Minnesota now can dream a little and make a run at a big name. Maturi certainly landed one for the Gophers men's basketball program in Tubby Smith.

"We were prepared to pay more for the coach when we [hired Brewster] four years ago," Maturi said. "Now can I pay the dollars that Urban Meyer are making? No. Nick Saban? No. We cannot go down that path. That's not a path that we can go down. But can we pay more than what we're paying, yes, we can. We can pay competitively."

The Minnesota job always will have its challenges, namely the location and the distance from many of the nation's recruiting hotbeds. But Wisconsin and Iowa face the same obstacles. And let's face it: recruiting didn't lead to Brewster's downfall; it was one of his strengths.

Minnesota also has a beautiful on-campus facility in TCF Bank Stadium, a major selling point for Maturi in this process.

There's no reason why Minnesota can't be a consistent bowl team and occasionally compete for Big Ten championships.

"Everything is here," Minnesota quarterback Adam Weber said Sunday. "The university gives everything a student-athlete needs to be successful, not only academically but athletically. It's just a matter of time. We will win football games here at the University of Minnesota. It's too bad that we haven't had the success, but ultimately, we will.

"That's a promise. It will happen here."

It needs to happen soon.
Click to expand...
 

50PoundHead said:
I think the Wisconsin model is seen as the way because of its durability. Alvarez installed a system that is still working. I think the same can be said of Ferentz in Iowa. If D'Antonio stays at MSU, we may see the same thing there.
Click to expand...

True. I see great similarities between Minnesota, Iowa, and Wisconsin in particular. We're all cold weather schools located in the upper Midwest, from states that are primarily rural and agrarian and not typically producing tons of great football talent ala Florida or Texas, all (with the exception of us WAY back in our glory years) traditional 'have-nots' in the college football world, but those other two schools have managed to establish a winning tradition in spite of all that. So what those schools prove is that it is eminently doable to rise above whatever natural limitations you might have and get beyond whatever obstacles might be holding you back.

So a 'Wisconsin model' doesn't necessarily mean copying their formula for success (which probably wouldn't even be possible to do anyway), but rather establishing our own formula for success, knowing that they've done it and realistically are a school and state that's very similar to our own. So basically what we need to do is find our own iteration of a Barry Alvarez or a Hayden Fry/Kirk Ferentz.

Easier said than done obviously, but still very doable. All we have to do is look at our neighbors to the south and east for confirmation of that fact. They've lifted themselves out of the college football dumpster, and we surely can too.
 



RailBaronYarr said:
........ My only problem was the last statement. Above .500 records with 8 and 9 win seasons sprinkled in there. We had that with Mason. reality is an 8 win season is 4-0 in non-conference and 4-4 in the Big Ten (or 3-5 with a bowl win). A 9 win season is 4-0 non-con and 5-3 B10 (or 4-4 B10 with a bowl win). Not acceptable for our goals as a football team, or anyone's for that matter. Maybe as a first step toward getting better or gaining momentum, but not for the long haul. 8-9 win seasons should be the mediocre to disappointing seasons, with a 10-11 win season being the ones sprinkled in. 10 wins COULD be a B10 title (undoubtedly a share), 11 wins would almost guarantee it. If we won 11 games once every 6-7 years I would be happy.
Click to expand...

It may be good to take a look at what many consider to be successful Big Ten programs and coaching records. RailBaron's take on acceptable goals for our program begs a bit of reflection on other BT teams as of late.

Tressel and Carr are the only recent BT coaches to have averaged 5 (.625) or more BT wins in their last 10 season. Ferentz hasn't done it (.566), Alvarez (.575) and Tiller (.513) didn't and suprisingly neither has JoPa (.548). Ferentz has done very well the last 5 years after his difficult start and probably has averaged 5 BT wins during that time.

And winning 4 NC games has become more of a challenge as Brewster saw to it to upgrade the schedule. Add in Nebraska and the road to 8-9 wins being called mediocre to disappointing just got a lot rougher and hazardous.

For us to win 5 BT games, we will have to win 2 of the annual Iowa, Nebraska, Wisconsin, MSU contests and become dominant winning 3 against NU, Michigan, Purdue and Illini. At least we do not have OSU and PSU on the schedule the next two seasons.

The .500 to .542 in the BT and 8-9 wins sprinkled in would be acceptable the first three years but then I would like us to make a run at a BT crown at least once every five years. A tough task but one that is worthy of shooting for and a huge challenge for the new HC.
 

For a time, some recruits saw the dome as a plus, because they could "play were the pros played". But this quickly turned into playing where the pros didn't want to play, as it didn't take long for the Vikings to grumble about the dome. I am skeptical that the dome was ever a real plus, I suspect that such positive assessments were cherry picking.

TCF has at least removed a negative, the locker room and the scoreboard are plusses. We just need to hire a better coach and get some better results. It's like being stuck in the ditch versus being totalled. If your stuck in the ditch, you need to get towed out. If you're totalled, you aren't going anywhere.
 

"After winning the Big Ten in 1962, Wisconsin went 31 years before claiming another title. Minnesota is in a 33-year drought without a championship..."

This should be 43, right?
 

Bayfieldgopher said:
It may be good to take a look at what many consider to be successful Big Ten programs and coaching records. RailBaron's take on acceptable goals for our program begs a bit of reflection on other BT teams as of late.

Tressel and Carr are the only recent BT coaches to have averaged 5 (.625) or more BT wins in their last 10 season. Ferentz hasn't done it (.566), Alvarez (.575) and Tiller (.513) didn't and suprisingly neither has JoPa (.548). Ferentz has done very well the last 5 years after his difficult start and probably has averaged 5 BT wins during that time.

And winning 4 NC games has become more of a challenge as Brewster saw to it to upgrade the schedule. Add in Nebraska and the road to 8-9 wins being called mediocre to disappointing just got a lot rougher and hazardous.

For us to win 5 BT games, we will have to win 2 of the annual Iowa, Nebraska, Wisconsin, MSU contests and become dominant winning 3 against NU, Michigan, Purdue and Illini. At least we do not have OSU and PSU on the schedule the next two seasons.

The .500 to .542 in the BT and 8-9 wins sprinkled in would be acceptable the first three years but then I would like us to make a run at a BT crown at least once every five years. A tough task but one that is worthy of shooting for and a huge challenge for the new HC.
Click to expand...

I guess we agree and disagree on a few points. I think making a run/winning the Big Ten once every 5 years is a reasonable aspiration. It means we are competitive and keep fans involved and interested.

However, A few points.. I took the .500 record the columnist said as overall, not B10. In any case, I don't think winning 4 NC games should be too difficult since our slate will typically consist of one medium to difficult BCS foe (California, Colorado, Oregon State type teams) that we should expect to win at least 50% of the time.

So, assuming we win 3-4 NC games a year, that leaves only 3-4games a year we have to win in the Big Ten to be "above .500" on a yearly basis. To me, despite the fact that we are playing teams like Nebraska, Iowa, Michigan, MSU, Northwestern, and Wisconsin every year (plus 2 of OSU, PSU, Illinois, Purdue, Indiana), we should at the very least EXPECT to win 3-4 of those games. That means we are being competitive with our rivals Iowa, Michigan, Nebraska, and Wisconsin (expect to win an average of 2 of those games a year), and taking 1-2 of NW/MSU and the mix of OSU/PSU/Ind/Ill/Pur. That is a mediocre year in my opinion. Pen State, OSU, Wisconsin, and Iowa fans don't (and I'd argue Michigan fans won't for much longer) tolerate seasons where they lose more games than that.

If we expect above .500 seasons with an occasional 8-9 win season, we are expecting to lose MOST of our rival games on a yearly basis with the occasional season where we split our rivalry games. We should EXPECT to split our rivalry games every year with the occasional year where we sweep them all or win 3 of the 4 and maybe lose one to the PSU/OSU type team, going 6-2 in conference or better yet 7-1, with 3-4 NC wins (I would assume a year we go 6-2 or 7-1 in conference would also mean we're good enough to sweep NC games).

That's not to say we won't have a down year once in 5 years - going 3-5 in conference play balances out the year we go 6-2 or 7-1. I'm just stating that expecting .500 or slightly above with an 8-9 win season once in a while (which to me means once ever 4-5 years) is setting ourselves up for total mediocrity. Just because we are getting a tougher schedule with the addition of Nebraska and Michigan to our yearly slate doesn't excuse us from demanding a winning B10 program.
 



You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom