Gopher recruit Owen Salzwedel, Rivals 3 star rating

[GopherSOB]

For those of you who chase or care about stars, Gopher recruit Owen Salzwedel was recently rated a 3 star 5.6 prospect by Rivals. I myself don't get to shook up over ratings but tend to concentrate on player upside and development. Anyway a 5.6 rating is pretty solid.
Go Gophers.

 

[gophmeister]

He ia certainly a nice looking kid who could end up at several positions (DE, DT, TE, OT).

 

[Unregistered User]

Rivals Profile

Shown as a "Solid Commit" on that site.

 

[Schnauzer]

He ia certainly a nice looking kid who could end up at several positions (DE, DT, TE, OT).

With all that, it should give him flexibility to fit in as a Gopher, and land him an attractive prom date.

 

[Gopherprof]

I don't really have a dog in the recruiting fight, but three stars from rivals is nothing special. There are over 1,500 high school players this year alone that have a rating of 3* or more from rivals. As a BCS school, 3* should be the standard, quite frankly.

 

[nc2mn]

The only way for a player to be a 4-star is to already be 300 or higher so the evaluators to be able to envision him in a specific position and see if he has the attributes for that specific position. Having the flexibility to fit several positions makes it hard on the rival folks.

 

[MaxyJR1]

I don't really have a dog in the recruiting fight, but three stars from rivals is nothing special. There are over 1,500 high school players this year alone that have a rating of 3* or more from rivals. As a BCS school, 3* should be the standard, quite frankly.

3* should be the standard if you are not a coach that brings kids into camp and evaluates them. This is why 2* kids get scholarships, they fit systems and with coaches better then the 3* kid. 2* kids will always get scholarships. I would say that any kid with a BCS scholarship should be raised to a 3* recruit automatically.

 

[Killjoy]

I don't really have a dog in the recruiting fight, but three stars from rivals is nothing special. There are over 1,500 high school players this year alone that have a rating of 3* or more from rivals. As a BCS school, 3* should be the standard, quite frankly.

So why are you bringing this up again? I really could care less that "There are over 1,500 high school players this year alone that have a rating of 3* or more from rivals." The only rating that really counts is the one the our coaches give a recruit. It should be clear to you by now that Kill and his coaches evaluations are much more reliable and meaningful than a Rivals' ranking.

 

[Gopherprof]

So why are you bringing this up again? I really could care less that "There are over 1,500 high school players this year alone that have a rating of 3* or more from rivals." The only rating that really counts is the one the our coaches give a recruit. It should be clear to you by now that Kill and his coaches evaluations are much more reliable and meaningful than a Rivals' ranking.

I don't know what you mean by again, but do you honestly not see the relevance? The thread uses the fact that he's a 3* player as something that would assuage those who care about star rankings. If you're going to use that as a metric, it's worth pointing out its actual/relative value.

I agree that Kill should offer anyone he sees fit. That said, I'm not sure why anything "should be clear". What has happened so far that could shape anyone's opinion about Kill? I realize that you super like him and are incredibly defensive about anything that could even possibly be construed as criticism, but I hope you're not beginning to transition that opinion into stated fact.

I would agree that the relative opinion of all coaches is certainly worth more than that of the online services, but if that's your standard, many of Kill's commits don't grade out particularly well either as they frequently have limited offer lists.

 

[Parski1]

It all depends if he was hand timed or clock timed for his 40...LOL!

 

[GoldenGopher2015]

It all depends if he was hand timed or clock timed for his 40...LOL!

I don't think we need to beat another dead horse.

 

[60's Guy]

It's not quite that easy

I don't really have a dog in the recruiting fight, but three stars from rivals is nothing special. There are over 1,500 high school players this year alone that have a rating of 3* or more from rivals. As a BCS school, 3* should be the standard, quite frankly.

If roughly 1,500 h.s. players are 3* or higher that leaves roughly more than 1,500 recruits who are 2* or less. If 120 BCS elgible schools each recruit 25 guys each year on average that is 3,000 recruits.

So, one, coach Kill doesn't care how many stars a kid has and two on the basis of the above math it is not just a given that each recruit is worthy of a 3* star rating in the service's eyes or their ratings wouldn't have any impact.

But from one observation at practice this fall, I like the Gophers' current freshman class. So, ya I think Kill can evaluate talent despite whatever the services say.

Of the 6 guys listed this year, 3 are 3*. 3 are 2* but everyone who comments says Wipson is a really good Minnesota high school player and deserves the offer. Myrick is from a tiny high school, really fast and not going to be highly rated because of his competition. Yet the coaches think he will transition.

We have lots to sell at the U but we are not Notre Dame and we are not Ohio State. We are getting better every day. Someday you'll see that.

 

[Gopherprof]

If roughly 1,500 h.s. players are 3* or higher that leaves roughly more than 1,500 recruits who are 2* or less. If 120 BCS elgible schools each recruit 25 guys each year on average that is 3,000 recruits.

25 is too large for the average size of a recruiting class, and if by "BCS eligible" you're including all of the FBS, then we're not just talking about Notre Dame and Ohio State, but Louisiana-Monroe, UMASS, and New Mexico State. Surely we can at least put ourselves above those schools, no?

So, one, coach Kill doesn't care how many stars a kid has and two on the basis of the above math it is not just a given that each recruit is worthy of a 3* star rating in the service's eyes or their ratings wouldn't have any impact.

I honestly don't understand the second part of what you're saying here, but I agree that Kill shouldn't concern himself with recruiting rankings.

But from one observation at practice this fall, I like the Gophers' current freshman class. So, ya I think Kill can evaluate talent despite whatever the services say.

Recruiting services are insufficient, but the observation of some guy at one practice isn't?

We have lots to sell at the U but we are not Notre Dame and we are not Ohio State. We are getting better every day. Someday you'll see that.

Ridiculous strawman. Nobody is expecting us to be Ohio State or Notre Dame. Nobody. I think organizationally we are clearly improving, and I hope that the added structure and discipline will pay off in the W-L column.

That said, none of this has ANYTHING to do with my singular, original point, which is that a 3* rating isn't anything to make a big deal over, given the massive number of players that receive such a rating. IF you care about such things, that is not something worth being excited over. If you don't, that's perfectly fine, but don't make my comment into something it wasn't.

 

[Sparlimb]

It should be clear to you by now that Kill and his coaches evaluations are much more reliable and meaningful than a Rivals' ranking.

What should make the clear? Our overly talented team that can't find room for super recruits?

 

[MaroonGopher]

I hate to do this, but lets look at what other schools offered Owen scholarships: Central Michigan, Illinois State and Northern Illinois...not exactly the cream of the crop. I don't want to hear that big time schools simply stopped recruiting him after he committed to Minnesota either -- that excuse can only be used so many times.

Personally, I think it's sad that a separate thread was warranted because a Minnesota recruit was listed as 3-stars. Is that what this program has come to? Getting excited because we have a 3-star recruit committed for next season? When a 3-star recruit signs with a Division II school, that's news. Not when he signs with a Big Ten program.

Yes, I will openly admit that I am one of those guys that gets caught up in how many stars a player has. Why? Because it's been proven over and over that players with 4 and 5-stars out of high school perform better in college than those of 2 and 3-stars. Thus, programs littered with 4 and 5-star prospects perform better as a team than programs with 2 and 3-star recruits (like Minnesota). Even with the coaching turnover, every recruiting class should include at least three players 4-stars or better. When J.Kill establishes himself, he will need to bring in at least five or six 4-star recruits every season. That's the only way he is going to compete for a Big Ten title. Sure, Glen Mason was able to bring this program to bowl games consistently with 3-star players, but didn't Minnesota fire him? I would also like to acknowledge that "super recruiter" Tim Brewster was an absolute bust, but he also signed the current team's best players (MarQueis Gray, 4-stars) and Rasheed Hageman (4 stars).

Let's be clear, it is possible to win with mainly 3-star recruits (Boise State and older TCU teams), but that remains the exception to the rule. In the long haul, teams with 4 and 5-star recruits succeed at a much greater level compared to teams with mainly 2 and 3-star recruits.

Look at the 2013 top 10 recruiting rankings according to Rivals.com. Michigan and USC have a combined 28!!!! 4-star players signed for next season (Minnesota, sadly, has zero). USC's average star ranking is above 4. The top six schools -- USC, Michigan, LSU, Notre Dame, Florida and Alabama -- each have an average star ranking 3.5 or higher. Each one of those programs has one thing in common: They win.

So, if you think Jerry Kill is going to simply roll up his sleeves, coach the hell out of 2-star prospects and win a Big Ten championship, you're wrong. He is going to have to find a way to lure talented players into the program, not simply players that are "hard workers" or "fit the system." Once he starts winning, better players are going to be attracted to the school. Until then, he's not only going to have to outwork every other school in the B1G on the field, but more importantly, he's going to have to out-recruit every other school in the B1G. Is Jerry Kill a great recruiter? It doesn't appear that way, but it's OK to admit the jury is still out on that. He was able to turn around Saginaw Valley State, Southern Illinois and Northern Illinois because he found players that fit his system and out-worked every other coach. That's fine when you are competing in the GLIAC, Missouri Valley and MAC. I'm not sure that can work in a major BCS conference.

 

[mngolf]

I hate to do this, but lets look at what other schools offered Owen scholarships: Central Michigan, Illinois State and Northern Illinois...not exactly the cream of the crop. I don't want to hear that big time schools simply stopped recruiting him after he committed to Minnesota either -- that excuse can only be used so many times.

Personally, I think it's sad that a separate thread was warranted because a Minnesota recruit was listed as 3-stars. Is that what this program has come to? Getting excited because we have a 3-star recruit committed for next season? When a 3-star recruit signs with a Division II school, that's news. Not when he signs with a Big Ten program.

Yes, I will openly admit that I am one of those guys that gets caught up in how many stars a player has. Why? Because it's been proven over and over that players with 4 and 5-stars out of high school perform better in college than those of 2 and 3-stars. Thus, programs littered with 4 and 5-star prospects perform better as a team than programs with 2 and 3-star recruits (like Minnesota). Even with the coaching turnover, every recruiting class should include at least three players 4-stars or better. When J.Kill establishes himself, he will need to bring in at least five or six 4-star recruits every season. That's the only way he is going to compete for a Big Ten title. Sure, Glen Mason was able to bring this program to bowl games consistently with 3-star players, but didn't Minnesota fire him? I would also like to acknowledge that "super recruiter" Tim Brewster was an absolute bust, but he also signed the current team's best players (MarQueis Gray, 4-stars) and Rasheed Hageman (4 stars).

Let's be clear, it is possible to win with mainly 3-star recruits (Boise State and older TCU teams), but that remains the exception to the rule. In the long haul, teams with 4 and 5-star recruits succeed at a much greater level compared to teams with mainly 2 and 3-star recruits.

Look at the 2013 top 10 recruiting rankings according to Rivals.com. Michigan and USC have a combined 28!!!! 4-star players signed for next season (Minnesota, sadly, has zero). USC's average star ranking is above 4. The top six schools -- USC, Michigan, LSU, Notre Dame, Florida and Alabama -- each have an average star ranking 3.5 or higher. Each one of those programs has one thing in common: They win.

So, if you think Jerry Kill is going to simply roll up his sleeves, coach the hell out of 2-star prospects and win a Big Ten championship, you're wrong. He is going to have to find a way to lure talented players into the program, not simply players that are "hard workers" or "fit the system." Once he starts winning, better players are going to be attracted to the school. Until then, he's not only going to have to outwork every other school in the B1G on the field, but more importantly, he's going to have to out-recruit every other school in the B1G. Is Jerry Kill a great recruiter? It doesn't appear that way, but it's OK to admit the jury is still out on that. He was able to turn around Saginaw Valley State, Southern Illinois and Northern Illinois because he found players that fit his system and out-worked every other coach. That's fine when you are competing in the GLIAC, Missouri Valley and MAC. I'm not sure that can work in a major BCS conference.

FWIW that hasn't done much for Notre Dame or Michigan in the last decade.

 

[short ornery norwegian]

You can nitpick almost any recruit at the U, over their Star rating, their number or quality of offers, and so forth.

Like it or not, the Gopher program is not at a point where they are going to be racking up a recruiting class featuring multiple 4* or 5* players. If you start setting numerical benchmarks, like "He will need to bring in at least 5 or 6 4-star recruits every season," then what do you do if you can't recruit that level of players - Quit? Anyone on this board could rattle off a list of 4* and 5* players who didn't pan or, or a list of 2* and 3* players who developed into solid performers. If star ratings were all that mattered, you wouldn't need coaches - heck, you wouldn't need to play the season - just give the championship trophy to the team with the highest average star-rated recruiting class.

It's game played by humans - coached by humans - and the star ratings are awarded by humans. And if there's one thing we know about humans, it's that they make mistakes, and they also surprise you by occasionally exceeding expectations.

 

[RoyalGopher]

I hate to do this, but lets look at what other schools offered Owen scholarships: Central Michigan, Illinois State and Northern Illinois...not exactly the cream of the crop. I don't want to hear that big time schools simply stopped recruiting him after he committed to Minnesota either -- that excuse can only be used so many times.

To be fair, Owen committed fairly early. I also don't think he attended very many B1G camps.

 

[Ole]

So, if you think Jerry Kill is going to simply roll up his sleeves, coach the hell out of 2-star prospects and win a Big Ten championship, you're wrong. He is going to have to find a way to lure talented players into the program, not simply players that are "hard workers" or "fit the system."

The thing is: 2 star players CAN be talented players. Physically talented. With speed and athleticism.
Not every 2 star kid is simply a "hard worker" or "system fit".
I'll go ahead and point out so far Kill has brought in kids that were 2 stars that seem to be excelling and standing out. Jones, Cockran, Thompson, Wells, Ekpe, Keith, and Eric Murray were all 2 stars.
Cockran, Ekpe, and Keith are very athletic DL's, with speed and growth potential. Thompson, Wells, and Murray are all supposedly going to play this year or already did last year as freshmen. Jones is at least a speedy specialist at best a multi-threat from the slot.

A 2 star could easily be out of position, undersized, or under recruited due to school size.
Not every 2 star player is simply a slow kid with a good motor. Kill seems to have an eye for kids with unlocked potential, so far he's found guys i wouldn't trade for other teams' recruits that end up impressing in shorts at camps or in highlight videos, earning big hype then transferring to FCS by their soph year.

 

[John Galt]

Q: Who had better recruiting success based on stars, Mason or Brewster?
A: Brewster

Q: Who won more games and had better football teams?
A: Mason

Q: How could that possibly be?
A: Superior talent evaluation regardless of recruiting rankings, having consistency on the team with staff and systems, better preparation and coaching

 

[dpodoll68]

What should make the clear? Our overly talented team that can't find room for super recruits?

You're not really this stupid. Kill has maintained employment as a football coach for almost 3 decades and has yet to be fired, even once, in an incredibly cutthroat business. If the Rivals guys were so great, they'd be working as coaches somewhere and getting paid a hell of a lot more than they are now. On average, I'll take Jerry Kill's opinion over that of any recruiting writer/analyst anywhere.

 

[Gopherprof]

You're not really this stupid. Kill has maintained employment as a football coach for almost 3 decades and has yet to be fired, even once, in an incredibly cutthroat business. If the Rivals guys were so great, they'd be working as coaches somewhere and getting paid a hell of a lot more than they are now. On average, I'll take Jerry Kill's opinion over that of any recruiting writer/analyst anywhere.

Star rankings, by themselves, are almost worthless. However, comparative offer lists (which most certainly effect star rankings) are not. Kill and co. are a quality staff, but so are many other staffs in the country. Apples to apples, I'll take a kid with other BCS offers over a kid that doesn't have them. I'll take Kill's opinion over any recruiting writer, but I'll take the collective opinion of college football coaches over the opinion of one.

 

[Killjoy]

Star rankings, by themselves, are almost worthless. However, comparative offer lists (which most certainly effect star rankings) are not. Kill and co. are a quality staff, but so are many other staffs in the country. Apples to apples, I'll take a kid with other BCS offers over a kid that doesn't have them. I'll take Kill's opinion over any recruiting writer, but I'll take the collective opinion of college football coaches over the opinion of one.

I understand your point and I would agree with you if that's all the information you have on the evaluation process. Now if the individual coach happen to be somebody like Gary Patterson or Chris Peterson and you know that they had done a complete analysis of the kid including his academics, character, desire, etc. I would most likely choose the individual coach because I would have greater f trust the reliability of the recommendation. My point is that it is very important to know who is doing the evaluation and how it was done.

 

[Bob_Loblaw]

Star rankings, by themselves, are almost worthless. However, comparative offer lists (which most certainly effect star rankings) are not. Kill and co. are a quality staff, but so are many other staffs in the country. Apples to apples, I'll take a kid with other BCS offers over a kid that doesn't have them. I'll take Kill's opinion over any recruiting writer, but I'll take the collective opinion of college football coaches over the opinion of one.

This is how I look at it as well.

I like Coach Kill and I am trusting him more and more each day with the emergence of some of the less than highley recruited players he has brought in (Wells, Thompson, Murray, Maye, Jones). However, as you pointed out, the collective opinion of college football coaches does trump the opinion of 1 coach (IMO).

 

[Killjoy]

This is how I look at it as well.

I like Coach Kill and I am trusting him more and more each day with the emergence of some of the less than highley recruited players he has brought in (Wells, Thompson, Murray, Maye, Jones). However, as you pointed out, the collective opinion of college football coaches does trump the opinion of 1 coach (IMO).

Bob do you see the problem with the logic in what you just posted? We know the above players were not highly rated or recruited. If that is the case the logical conclusion is that most coaches rated them low. Yet Coach Kill recruited them and now it appears that they should have been rated higher by many of the other coaches. Therefore I ask you who then trumps whom here? I would say Coach Kill trumps the collective opinion of college football coaches.

P.S. Group and majority decisions are just that. It doesn't make them right. That is why the best system of government may be a benevolent dictators. The big problem is that there aren't to may around and they are hard to get rid of if it turns out they are not benevolent. An good example where you wouldn't want to go with the majority opinion is the GopherHole. Just think what a disaster it would be if the coaches followed some of the majority opinions from here.

 

[60's Guy]

"good example where you wouldn't want to go with the majority opinion is the GopherHole. Just think what a disaster it would be if the coaches followed some of the majority opinions from here."

Funny. Scarey True.

 

[Deleted_User]

I believe Kill is real and that the 3 star was real as well.

 

[Bob_Loblaw]

Bob do you see the problem with the logic in what you just posted? We know the above players were not highly rated or recruited. If that is the case the logical conclusion is that most coaches rated them low. Yet Coach Kill recruited them and now it appears that they should have been rated higher by many of the other coaches. Therefore I ask you who then trumps whom here? I would say Coach Kill trumps the collective opinion of college football coaches.

P.S. Group and majority decisions are just that. It doesn't make them right. That is why the best system of government may be a benevolent dictators. The big problem is that there aren't to may around and they are hard to get rid of if it turns out they are not benevolent. An good example where you wouldn't want to go with the majority opinion is the GopherHole. Just think what a disaster it would be if the coaches followed some of the majority opinions from here.

I hear what you're saying, but generally, most of the coaches throughout the country know a lot about football. Not all of them, that's why it's important some times to look at the success of certain coaches who are offering. In general, if we sign a player who has offers from several other succesful programs, I feel better about that kid than I would a kid who doesn't. I respect Coach Kill's opinion, but I don't think he's perfect. He's going to make mistakes. I think it's more likely that he'll make a mistake, than he'll make a mistake at the same time as other really intelligent football coaches.

As to your political analogy, I disagree. You can get things done faster under a dictatorship, but they are FULL of terrible ideas. Things don't happen quickly with democratic states, but the ideas are almost always better than the governance that flows from dictatorships.

 

[RoyalGopher]

This is how I look at it as well.

I like Coach Kill and I am trusting him more and more each day with the emergence of some of the less than highley recruited players he has brought in (Wells, Thompson, Murray, Maye, Jones). However, as you pointed out, the collective opinion of college football coaches does trump the opinion of 1 coach (IMO).

I agree for the most part, but you have to remember that every coach recruits to their system. Some players are meant for a one back system, some for a spread, etc.

 

[GopherGod]

I agree for the most part, but you have to remember that every coach recruits to their system. Some players are meant for a one back system, some for a spread, etc.

True, but coach Kill's system isn't that unique or exotic. Many coaches are running the same or very similar systems and looking for the same types of players as Kill is.