Fleck's Ego

dpodoll68

Elite Poster
Joined
Nov 24, 2008
Messages
18,979
Reaction score
283
Points
83
With a month before signing period, there isn't a 2017 kid that was committed under Claeys that went somewhere else who is now contributing.
Well, this isn't even remotely true.

Corey Gaynor - starting C for Miami, generally considered one of the best players for a top-15 team, already named ACC OL of the week once this year

Raheem Layne - played in all 13 games for Indiana in 2019 (starting 5), now out for most/all of the 2020 season with injury

Eric Abojei - starts on OL for Wyoming, generally considered one of their better players with a good shot of being named all-conference

Brett Kittrell - starting C for Ohio

Kyrei Fisher - backup LB for Oregon St.

Bryson Jackson - backup LB for Baylor

Josh Croslen - started 9 games as a sophomore for Bowling Green, transferred to UTSA, looks like he might be injured? Not sure of his current status.

Javan Hawes - backup WR for Arkansas St.

Claudin Cherelus - starting LB for UMass in 2019, transferred to Alcorn St. and will presumably start there if they play their spring season
 

PMWinSTP

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 11, 2015
Messages
9,723
Reaction score
774
Points
113
Well, this isn't even remotely true.

Corey Gaynor - starting C for Miami, generally considered one of the best players for a top-15 team, already named ACC OL of the week once this year

Raheem Layne - played in all 13 games for Indiana in 2019 (starting 5), now out for most/all of the 2020 season with injury

Eric Abojei - starts on OL for Wyoming, generally considered one of their better players with a good shot of being named all-conference

Brett Kittrell - starting C for Ohio

Kyrei Fisher - backup LB for Oregon St.

Bryson Jackson - backup LB for Baylor

Josh Croslen - started 9 games as a sophomore for Bowling Green, transferred to UTSA, looks like he might be injured? Not sure of his current status.

Javan Hawes - backup WR for Arkansas St.

Claudin Cherelus - starting LB for UMass in 2019, transferred to Alcorn St. and will presumably start there if they play their spring season
Waiting for ftf's qualifier response...
 

Some guy

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 1, 2014
Messages
7,407
Reaction score
1,033
Points
113
At no point in time have I ever said we should look at getting rid of PJ. Why are you so defensive?

If a message board can't include criticism, why have one?

I find it odd that a developmental program doesn't take the opportunity to, you know, develop players in games when presented with cases for that. Blow out wins and losses are those times to let the younger, inexperienced players get their feet wet in D1 football. It's not a time to pad stats for starters.
Take any position on the team. You really think a Soph., Fr, or Redshirt Fr. wants to practice every day with no chance of seeing the field, unless there's an injury, because we play the starters the whole game regardless of score? I would think a lot of them would want to transfer to get some actual playing time.
Why are you so defensive?
You can think I’m wrong and I don’t care

PJ Fleck has done some things I disagree with. I don’t think Ibrahim should get carrie/ with the game out of reach. I think the offense should simplify reads for theQB because he is clearly struggling in the new system.

I am going to defer to him over you on developing talent though considering he has done it multiple times at the d1 level and you cant handle someone saying you’re wrong on a message board
 

GFBfan

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 25, 2009
Messages
2,608
Reaction score
201
Points
63
Why are you so defensive?
You can think I’m wrong and I don’t care

PJ Fleck has done some things I disagree with. I don’t think Ibrahim should get carrie/ with the game out of reach. I think the offense should simplify reads for theQB because he is clearly struggling in the new system.

I am going to defer to him over you on developing talent though considering he has done it multiple times at the d1 level and you cant handle someone saying you’re wrong on a message board
I thought you said no criticism on a message board? :p

Morgan is struggling. Why is up for debate. All the more reason to let him stand on the sideline in a blowout and maybe see the game from a different angle and be able to go through his reads while not having the pressure of making a throw.
 

Some guy

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 1, 2014
Messages
7,407
Reaction score
1,033
Points
113
I thought you said no criticism on a message board? :p

Morgan is struggling. Why is up for debate. All the more reason to let him stand on the sideline in a blowout and maybe see the game from a different angle and be able to go through his reads while not having the pressure of making a throw.
Where did I say no criticism?
 

Desertbobcat

Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2016
Messages
140
Reaction score
9
Points
18
Fix the def. Put number 34 in Coughlins old spot, move 8 to inside lb move 13 to strong safety, put #91 at #34's old spot and STOP THE RUN and SET THE EDGE!!!!
 

RogueGopher

Active member
Joined
Jul 8, 2019
Messages
310
Reaction score
224
Points
43
Well, this isn't even remotely true.

Corey Gaynor - starting C for Miami, generally considered one of the best players for a top-15 team, already named ACC OL of the week once this year

Raheem Layne - played in all 13 games for Indiana in 2019 (starting 5), now out for most/all of the 2020 season with injury

Eric Abojei - starts on OL for Wyoming, generally considered one of their better players with a good shot of being named all-conference

Brett Kittrell - starting C for Ohio

Kyrei Fisher - backup LB for Oregon St.

Bryson Jackson - backup LB for Baylor

Josh Croslen - started 9 games as a sophomore for Bowling Green, transferred to UTSA, looks like he might be injured? Not sure of his current status.

Javan Hawes - backup WR for Arkansas St.

Claudin Cherelus - starting LB for UMass in 2019, transferred to Alcorn St. and will presumably start there if they play their spring season
Notice how most of these guys had to transfer to non-power 5 schools. Not having them isn't what's holding the Gophers back right now.
 

OddStack

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 26, 2012
Messages
1,470
Reaction score
128
Points
63
Notice how most of these guys had to transfer to non-power 5 schools. Not having them isn't what's holding the Gophers back right now.
Yet, 2 of these are P5 LBs. Do you think they'd have a chance to start or provide depth here. From what I've seen, there is no doubt they'd be in the mix at a minimum!
 

Face The Facts

Fleck Superfan
Joined
Feb 26, 2013
Messages
8,576
Reaction score
969
Points
113
Yet, 2 of these are P5 LBs. Do you think they'd have a chance to start or provide depth here. From what I've seen, there is no doubt they'd be in the mix at a minimum!
They would have hung around for 3 years playing behind Martin and Coughlin (and Oliver last year).
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
18,084
Reaction score
3,474
Points
113
Therein lies a core paradox: high level recruits only want to wait probably a max of two years before seeing the field significantly --- but you can't just boot a guy who started last year, and is a junior or senior this year, because the new(er) guy wants to play.

And so, what might be seen as a huge strength of a team -- having a bunch of seniors starting at the same time on O and/or D -- can paradoxically result in a rapid regression when they graduate, because it's not possible to keep "mid-aged" depth built up behind that group, as those players won't be happy.


In such situations, there is a possible solution: transfers. Oddly enough, three defensive starters/contributors (Dew, Schad, BSJ) are indeed transfers. And yet PJ has taken a fairly firm stance against having too many transfers. We probably should've gone after more for this season. Some of that has to fall on PJ, for not recognizing what was going to happen.
 

PMWinSTP

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 11, 2015
Messages
9,723
Reaction score
774
Points
113
Therein lies a core paradox: high level recruits only want to wait probably a max of two years before seeing the field significantly --- but you can't just boot a guy who started last year, and is a junior or senior this year, because the new(er) guy wants to play.

And so, what might be seen as a huge strength of a team -- having a bunch of seniors starting at the same time on O and/or D -- can paradoxically result in a rapid regression when they graduate, because it's not possible to keep "mid-aged" depth built up behind that group, as those players won't be happy.


In such situations, there is a possible solution: transfers. Oddly enough, three defensive starters/contributors (Dew, Schad, BSJ) are indeed transfers. And yet PJ has taken a fairly firm stance against having too many transfers. We probably should've gone after more for this season. Some of that has to fall on PJ, for not recognizing what was going to happen.
You don't need to boot the previous year's starters, just start to mix in those high level recruits to get them playing time and then you can evaluate them. As Gophs had found out from time to time, some players are better in games as opposed to practice.
 

A_Slab_of_Bacon

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 21, 2015
Messages
15,306
Reaction score
2,285
Points
113
Yet, 2 of these are P5 LBs. Do you think they'd have a chance to start or provide depth here. From what I've seen, there is no doubt they'd be in the mix at a minimum!
That's a pretty low bar.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
18,084
Reaction score
3,474
Points
113
You don't need to boot the previous year's starters, just start to mix in those high level recruits to get them playing time and then you can evaluate them. As Gophs had found out from time to time, some players are better in games as opposed to practice.
As long as they're OK with being a "rotational player" (say, a rotation of 5 reps to 2 reps, or worse) in their third year, that can work.

Doesn't work on the OL, where rotations usually aren't as much of a thing.


Again though, the higher rated the prospect, the more playing time he's going to demand earlier. I say the paradox is still afoot.


The "ideal" thing is to always have a strong mix of classes starting on the unit, so that you never have a huge chunk of guys graduating one year and potentially only very young guys to replace them with.
 

Go Gophs

Active member
Joined
Jan 16, 2009
Messages
704
Reaction score
103
Points
43
We are currently seven years into that approach with the BBall squad. Fleck's staff has already experienced a good amount of turnover. I said depending how the rest of this year goes, his seat could get warm. If he has an average 2021 season, like .500 or below, it could get hot going into 2022, which is year six (five if you start at Year Zero).

Only 12 FBS HC have been in their current positions for more than 10 years, only 30 have been in their current positions for more than 5 years.
And I would venture to guess that those 12 have successful, stable programs.

It's high time for this athletic department to pick and guy and stick with him. There will be ups and downs, but how do you even talk about hot seat when the guy gave you the best Gopher Football season ever, besides the 60s that I was not a part of.
 

Go Gophs

Active member
Joined
Jan 16, 2009
Messages
704
Reaction score
103
Points
43
People were blind to the defense not having experience. I was guilty. I assumed guys with no experience would jump right in and be good. They weren't. They will all get better in a year that they won't lose any eligibility. Couple that with a normal off-season and hopefully we will all forget 2020 in 2021.
Not all true though. Players play. Look around. Freshman compete in every program at a high level. Some will get better some will need to be replaced with better talent.
 

Go Gophs

Active member
Joined
Jan 16, 2009
Messages
704
Reaction score
103
Points
43
Therein lies a core paradox: high level recruits only want to wait probably a max of two years before seeing the field significantly --- but you can't just boot a guy who started last year, and is a junior or senior this year, because the new(er) guy wants to play.

And so, what might be seen as a huge strength of a team -- having a bunch of seniors starting at the same time on O and/or D -- can paradoxically result in a rapid regression when they graduate, because it's not possible to keep "mid-aged" depth built up behind that group, as those players won't be happy.


In such situations, there is a possible solution: transfers. Oddly enough, three defensive starters/contributors (Dew, Schad, BSJ) are indeed transfers. And yet PJ has taken a fairly firm stance against having too many transfers. We probably should've gone after more for this season. Some of that has to fall on PJ, for not recognizing what was going to happen.
I don't buy this theory either. How do the top programs do it then?

If recruits are that high level, they start right away if they are able to grasp schemes/concepts. They don't sit. Also, if they are better as a freshman that a senior that has started, they will play. This is Big Ten football, not everyone gets a trophy pee-wee league.

The problem with the defense this year is two-fold.

1. You are replacing 3 NFL players who were some of the best in the Big Ten. 1 of which, might be the best defensive back to ever put on maroon and gold. Heck, he is gonna be defensive rookie of the year.

2. The guys you replaced them with are not even close to that level, and they are also learning on the go.

One more quick one. - The kicking game puts these guys in a hole almost every series. That part I am gonna put on the coaching. Find someone that can punt the ball or kick a short field goal. This is flat out unacceptable to have this kind of performance from a Power 5 school.
 

PMWinSTP

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 11, 2015
Messages
9,723
Reaction score
774
Points
113
And I would venture to guess that those 12 have successful, stable programs.

It's high time for this athletic department to pick and guy and stick with him. There will be ups and downs, but how do you even talk about hot seat when the guy gave you the best Gopher Football season ever, besides the 60s that I was not a part of.
Stable is objective, but about 75% do have successful records. Almost all were successful in their first 4 years relative to their predecessor.
 

MaxyJR1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
7,428
Reaction score
232
Points
63
Not all true though. Players play. Look around. Freshman compete in every program at a high level. Some will get better some will need to be replaced with better talent.
If Freshmen are going to play we want it to be by beating out upper classmen, not because there are no upper classmen.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
18,084
Reaction score
3,474
Points
113
1) Disagree on the Auburn game. Their team and coaches repeatedly stated they were all business and planned to win that game. The "dejected" excuse is thin. Minnesota beat Auburn straight up, sorry.

2) The Iowa loss was disappointing, but mostly because MN got badly outcoached in the first 20 minutes. They dominated the rest of the game, put up about 400 yards of offense, and held Iowa to something like 150 from that point forward.

3) The Wisconsin loss was horrible, but part of it was Wisconsin making big play after big play on offense and opening up a lead that changed Minnesota's gameplan considerably. But no excuses -- Wisconsin came in and executed a great plan...and the scoreboard reflected that.

4) Agree most of the rest of the B1G schedule was against "down" teams, but MN didn't just win those games -- they pretty much dominated in every facet of those games. They weren't squeaking out wins against similarly talented/well-coached teams. They were blowing people out for the most part.

5) Agree the non-con was VERY shaky. Still struggling to understand that, but clearly both offense and defense made adjustments based on those games and improved steadily as the year went along. Does anyone think GSU or SDSU would've been competitive with Minnesota at the end of the year?
Great post. Sorry I didn't get to it until now.

1 - zero chance that Auburn wasn't dejected after winning an emotional Iron Bowl against Bama and ending up ranked #12 in the CFP. They thought they deserved a NY6 game. That's what I mean by dejected. They also probably thought they deserved the higher-order bowl game against Michigan, that went to Bama.

Yes obviously we beat them straight up in the game. I don't deny that. And I think it was the 2nd best/most important win of the 2019 season.

2 - Yards don't win. Points do. And we scored 6 of our 19 in the first half. We did not dominate the 2nd half. If we had, we would've scored a TD on our second drive and/or not let them kick a FG on their third drive. Even if we had done the latter, we could've then gone for 2 after scoring the TD on our fourth drive to tie the game at 20.

Regardless, it was a competitive loss. That's the type of game I expected last weekend. If we had gotten that, I doubt anyone would've been as pissed.

4 - Purdue game: they lost Sindelar and Moore I think on the same play? That's obviously "down". We did blow them out the first half after that, but they regrouped and the game score ended as 38-31.
Next 4: Illinois, Nebraska, Rutgers, Maryland. Four awful teams. Not "down", just bad. We took care of business, no doubt.
Then Penn St, then Iowa.
Then NW. They were very much "down" last year. No QB. Still, they played us very tough. Game score was 38-22. Again, not a domination.
Then Wisc.

So the point mostly comes down to Purdue and NW, I guess. They were "down" when we played them, in reasonable sense. We didn't dominate either. We were lucky then, in those senses, that they weren't their normal selves.

5 - you raise a great point about playing at the end of the year. I'd like to think no. Hope so.
 
Top Bottom