Roster Evolution from 2021 to 2022

Gophergrandpa

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 17, 2018
Messages
586
Reaction score
441
Points
63
I'm not worried about the scholarship grid--coaches will figure out as they always do. I am interested, however, in which Gophers must move on after the 2021 season. The following eleven players were listed as Seniors or Redshirt Seniors in 2020 and appear on the 2021 roster as "Graduate Students," apparently by virtue of the added year for COVID: Bryce Witham; Sam Schleuter; Connor Olson; Ko Kieft; Justus Harris; Clay Geary; Micah Dew-Treadway; Coney Durr; Phillip Howard; Cal Swenson; Bishop McDonald. I assume that means we have the ability in 2021 to carry these eleven as scholarship players, above our normal allocation of 85 scholarships ... unless there are scholarship budgeting obstacles specific to the U. That is a decent amount of talent we are privileged to have hang around another year ... and a lot of experience lost after 2021.

Here are the players listed as Redshirt Seniors on the 2021 roster who were Redshirt Juniors in 2020: Blaise Andries; Axel Ruschmeyer; Tanner Morgan; John Michael Schmitz; Boye Mafe; Mo Ibrahim; Esezi Otomewo; and Chris Atman-Bell. I assume all these folks theoretically get another year in 2022 if they want it, but I'm not sure whether in 2022 the 85 scholarship rule will kick in and be a limiter (or if Athletic Department budget limitations might affect them). And the NFL might beckon for some.

Here are the players listed a true Seniors on the 2021 roster who were true Juniors in 2020: Daniel Faalale (seems to ignore his opt-out of 2020??); Mariano Sori-Marin; Jack Gibbens; Jordan Howden; Thomas Rush; and Terrell Smith. I assume these folks theoretically also get another year in 2022 if they want it ... provided the team isn't then bound by the 85 scholarships rule or internal scholarship budgets. Val Martin and Niles Pickney are also listed as Seniors on the 2021 roster, but I haven't checked their former school rosters as to 2020 status.

Bottom Line: This year's team will have a plethora of experienced players, guys who have been around college football a long time and who have played in a lot of games. Subject to NFL draft opportunities, and NCAA rules and U of Minn internal scholarship constraints not yet entirely clear, we could lose a lot of talent and experience I after the 2021 season. Watching how PJ navigates the roster transition from 2021 to 2022 will be fascinating.
 

MNVCGUY

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
10,091
Reaction score
3,134
Points
113
I don't pretend to understand how this all works with the extra year but it would seem that if a player was going to be a true Junior in 2020 (3rd year with the team), then 2021 would still technically be year 3 of the 5 they are eligible for, 2022 would be year 4. If any of those players would end up not playing enough in 21 or 22 to burn a year then they probably would have access to another year in 2023 as well since they didn't use their redshirt yet.

Messy, but I am sure the teams have a more clear understanding of what each guys situation is.
 

Gophergrandpa

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 17, 2018
Messages
586
Reaction score
441
Points
63
I don't pretend to understand how this all works with the extra year but it would seem that if a player was going to be a true Junior in 2020 (3rd year with the team), then 2021 would still technically be year 3 of the 5 they are eligible for, 2022 would be year 4. If any of those players would end up not playing enough in 21 or 22 to burn a year then they probably would have access to another year in 2023 as well since they didn't use their redshirt yet.

Messy, but I am sure the teams have a more clear understanding of what each guys situation is.
I think no one quite knows how things will work in 2022 and beyond. I do trust PJ and his coaches to adapt.
 

60's Guy

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 29, 2010
Messages
5,842
Reaction score
921
Points
113
You can hear it in the distance..."Youngest team in America." "Least experienced team in college football."
We pretty much "have to" win this year. I think PJ would agree all winter, all spring, all summer but
we'll see what he says half way through the 2021 season depending how things are going.
 



MNVCGUY

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
10,091
Reaction score
3,134
Points
113
You can hear it in the distance..."Youngest team in America." "Least experienced team in college football."
We pretty much "have to" win this year. I think PJ would agree all winter, all spring, all summer but
we'll see what he says half way through the 2021 season depending how things are going.
It is impressive how hard a few of you work to find reasons not to like Fleck. I mean you would think you would be happy that the program seems to be in the best place it has been in a long a$$ time and that things are trending in the right direction on a lot of fronts.

If things are building the way they appear to be the youngest team in America stuff (which was true by the way) is in the rear view mirror and we start to hit the reload instead of rebuild which was so common under previous staffs.

But hey, you do you. I plan to enjoy the ride and not stress about what the future holds. This should be a very strong Gopher team in 2021 and the future looks very bright for the program. Maybe it will all come crashing down at some point but right now Gopher football is finally moving towards becoming the program we have been wanting it to become.
 

Gophers1992

Active member
Joined
Oct 8, 2019
Messages
310
Reaction score
246
Points
43
It is impressive how hard a few of you work to find reasons not to like Fleck. I mean you would think you would be happy that the program seems to be in the best place it has been in a long a$$ time and that things are trending in the right direction on a lot of fronts.

If things are building the way they appear to be the youngest team in America stuff (which was true by the way) is in the rear view mirror and we start to hit the reload instead of rebuild which was so common under previous staffs.

But hey, you do you. I plan to enjoy the ride and not stress about what the future holds. This should be a very strong Gopher team in 2021 and the future looks very bright for the program. Maybe it will all come crashing down at some point but right now Gopher football is finally moving towards becoming the program we have been wanting it to become.
Post of the year.
 

GVBadger

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 24, 2008
Messages
1,345
Reaction score
43
Points
48
Just read an article that currently in 2022 teams are expected to be at 85, regardless of how many players want the extra year of eligibility. Everyone is going to have to choose between new high school recruits and keeping players for an additional year.

Article stated how it is really going to put a strain on recruiting high school kids for the next 3 years if the NCAA does not allow for extra scholarships starting in '22. If you are not a clear starter, I think most kids who may want that extra year of eligibility may not be invited back.

Going to be difficult for everyone, hopefully the NCAA will step in as they did in '21.
 

MNVCGUY

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
10,091
Reaction score
3,134
Points
113
Just read an article that currently in 2022 teams are expected to be at 85, regardless of how many players want the extra year of eligibility. Everyone is going to have to choose between new high school recruits and keeping players for an additional year.

Article stated how it is really going to put a strain on recruiting high school kids for the next 3 years if the NCAA does not allow for extra scholarships starting in '22. If you are not a clear starter, I think most kids who may want that extra year of eligibility may not be invited back.

Going to be difficult for everyone, hopefully the NCAA will step in as they did in '21.
Yeah, I am sure teams are working overtime juggling what their roster looks like now and what it is going to look like over the next few seasons. May very well lead to some smaller than normal high school classes over the next few years at a lot of schools.

Could lead to a talent boom at the FCS level as guys who would typically have ended up going FBS have to drop down.
 



PMWinSTP

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 11, 2015
Messages
10,572
Reaction score
1,346
Points
113
Yeah, I am sure teams are working overtime juggling what their roster looks like now and what it is going to look like over the next few seasons. May very well lead to some smaller than normal high school classes over the next few years at a lot of schools.

Could lead to a talent boom at the FCS level as guys who would typically have ended up going FBS have to drop down.
Will be interesting as the extra year of eligibility also applies to FCS.
 

Gophergrandpa

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 17, 2018
Messages
586
Reaction score
441
Points
63
OR we will be adding a dozen guys from the transfer portal next year.
There has been, for several schools, a shift away from JUCO to Transfer Portal when filling in talent gaps that appear because of recruiting unevenness, flops, etc. I do think PJ is tuned in to all this ... but as I look around the FBS, so are many, many other coaches.
 

A_Slab_of_Bacon

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 21, 2015
Messages
16,649
Reaction score
3,406
Points
113
There has been, for several schools, a shift away from JUCO to Transfer Portal when filling in talent gaps that appear because of recruiting unevenness, flops, etc. I do think PJ is tuned in to all this ... but as I look around the FBS, so are many, many other coaches.
Heavy JUCO usage seems to also be associated with coach's with really bad teams ... short tenures at their school too. It seems to be a recipie for 4 or 5 years into a tenure ... to be at square one if you rely on too many JUCO guys.

JUCO talent is so variable it seems like a roll of the dice. Transfer portal, particularly P5 guys or players who have done well... at least you know someone at some level thought 'this guy can do the job' or they've actually done it.
 
Last edited:

PMWinSTP

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 11, 2015
Messages
10,572
Reaction score
1,346
Points
113
Heavy JUCO usage seems to also be associated with coach's with really bad teams ... short tenures at their school too. It seems to be a recipie for 4 or 5 years into a tenure ... to be at square one if you rely on too many JUCO guys.

JUCO talent is so variable it seems like a roll of the dice. Transfer portal, particularly P5 guys or players who have done well... at least you know someone at some level thought 'this guy can do the job' or they've actually done it.
I think you'd be surprised at how many perennial top FBS programs pull in JUCO transfers.
 



MNVCGUY

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
10,091
Reaction score
3,134
Points
113
I think you'd be surprised at how many perennial top FBS programs pull in JUCO transfers.
Yeah, really seems to vary from program to program. Some places have great luck with JUCO players, others prefer to avoid them for the most part. Very unscientific but from what I have seen the JUCO players are very hit and miss and the success rate feels like it is somewhere in the area of 50%.

Fleck clearly favors the transfer route over the JUCO route as he has brought in just a handful of JC guys during his time here. He also seems to have a much higher success rate with the transfers he has brought in.
 

SixBySix

Well-known member
Joined
May 23, 2019
Messages
459
Reaction score
463
Points
63
I think you'd be surprised at how many perennial top FBS programs pull in JUCO transfers.
That can make sense as long as there is a relatively limited number of great players coming out of JUCOs each year while still meaning that teams that heavily rely on JUCO transfers will struggle. The perennial top teams are getting the cream of the crop; teams who are taking 5+ JUCO transfer every year likely are not.
 

short ornery norwegian

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
11,061
Reaction score
2,785
Points
113
it will be interesting to see how the transfer portal impacts JUCO's in the future. I can see coaches preferring to get players from the portal as opposed to JUCO's. Let's face it - players wind up in JUCO's for a reason - or possibly several reasons. for some, it's academics. for others, they just weren't big or strong or fast enough to land a D1 scholarship.

Either way, I could see coaches favoring transfers over JUCO's because the transfers presumably did not have the same issues getting into a D1 school.

as noted, if there is a coaching change and a program is in need of an immediate infusion of talent - or just needs more bodies, then JUCO's might still be a way to go.

But if you're looking for one or two kids to fill out a position group, then I suspect that coaches would prefer transfers over JUCO's.
 

A_Slab_of_Bacon

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 21, 2015
Messages
16,649
Reaction score
3,406
Points
113
That can make sense as long as there is a relatively limited number of great players coming out of JUCOs each year while still meaning that teams that heavily rely on JUCO transfers will struggle. The perennial top teams are getting the cream of the crop; teams who are taking 5+ JUCO transfer every year likely are not.
Yeah anyone pulling a JUCO or two here and there, totally understandable.

If you're picking them up often, problems aren't going to get fixed unless you're some magic JUCO talent finder... and well in that case you'd think you could do it crooting too.
 

Gophergrandpa

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 17, 2018
Messages
586
Reaction score
441
Points
63
Heavy JUCO usage seems to also be associated with coach's with really bad teams ... short tenures at their school too. It seems to be a recipie for 4 or 5 years into a tenure ... to be at square one if you rely on too many JUCO guys.

JUCO talent is so variable it seems like a roll of the dice. Transfer portal, particularly P5 guys or players who have done well... at least you know someone at some level thought 'this guy can do the job' or they've actually done it.
I suspect that transfer portal guys, at least ones with a few years of P5 college under their belts, pose less of a scholastic risk.
 

MGGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
4,252
Reaction score
767
Points
113
I gotta think coaches will continue taking the best players they can get. Period. JUCO, HS, FBS transfer, FCS transfer, etc. The transfer portal simply gives them many more options. There may be less risk with an established FBS player who's stayed eligible and put some film down against other FBS schools, but if a JUCO player is clearly a superior player, he'll be just fine and land on his feet.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
24,402
Reaction score
5,884
Points
113
This issue over 2022-2025 I think will just accelerate a trend that would've happened anyway.

That is, P5 schools are going to be taking transfer portal guys over high school guys, more and more.


Particularly at a place like Minnesota, I see more value in taking guys like:

- lower level player that has really established himself and performed well after 2-3 years, with 2-3 years left, who wants to step it up
- highly rated high school players who go to upper level P5 programs, and it doesn't work out like they thought/hoped it would (for whatever reasons, so long as not "bad apples"), and are now willing to step down a half-step within P5 rather than take a lateral move to another high level P5

over 3* kids with mostly G5 offers.


The new WR transfer from Texas A&M comes to mind.



Not at all saying we're going to zero high school kids. Especially a nice handful of 3* Minnesota players, each year (and occasionally reaching up when there is a nice 4* player who is willing to stay home).

But maybe half/half? We'll see.
 

Bob_Loblaw

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 23, 2009
Messages
13,335
Reaction score
2,907
Points
113
I suspect that transfer portal guys, at least ones with a few years of P5 college under their belts, pose less of a scholastic risk.

Generally, yeah, you're right. I also think a larger number of SRs in HS probably went the JuCo route.

There were less D1 openings due to the unique eligibility requirements. Many of them likely missed year(s) to showcase their improvements. I would imagine there are more qualifiers that went JuCo than most years.
 

fmlizard

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 19, 2012
Messages
2,695
Reaction score
1,155
Points
113
This issue over 2022-2025 I think will just accelerate a trend that would've happened anyway.

That is, P5 schools are going to be taking transfer portal guys over high school guys, more and more.


Particularly at a place like Minnesota, I see more value in taking guys like:

- lower level player that has really established himself and performed well after 2-3 years, with 2-3 years left, who wants to step it up
- highly rated high school players who go to upper level P5 programs, and it doesn't work out like they thought/hoped it would (for whatever reasons, so long as not "bad apples"), and are now willing to step down a half-step within P5 rather than take a lateral move to another high level P5

over 3* kids with mostly G5 offers.


The new WR transfer from Texas A&M comes to mind.



Not at all saying we're going to zero high school kids. Especially a nice handful of 3* Minnesota players, each year (and occasionally reaching up when there is a nice 4* player who is willing to stay home).

But maybe half/half? We'll see.
Minnesota is positioned nicely for the Transfer Portal for the reasons you state. We're in a nice Goldylocks middle where we can take in step ups from G5 and FCS, and also take fallen 4 and 5 stars from high prestige programs. Meanwhile, not a lot of high quality Gophers are likely to jet except to NFL.
 




Top Bottom