STrib: Could the Gophers find a way to duplicate Indiana’s football success?

[BleedGopher]

Per Randy:

It’s been six weeks since Indiana won the College Football Playoff, completing a rags-to-riches story that saw a program with the second-worst all-time winning percentage (42.3%) among Power Four conference schools climb to the sport’s pinnacle by winning its first national championship.

Yes, the Indiana Hoosiers are college football’s national champions, and it still seems strange hearing those words roll off someone’s tongue.

Of course, the first reaction to the Hoosiers’ coronation for many fans in Minnesota was, “If Indiana can win it all, why can’t the Gophers?”

Technically, the Gophers — or any other Football Bowl Subdivision team — can win a national championship in football. In fact, Minnesota has won seven. Of course, the Gophers’ last national title came 66 years ago. Moreover, they last won the Big Ten championship in 1967 when they shared the title with Purdue and, yep, Indiana.

College football in 2026 barely resembles what it looked like in the 1960s, and realistically, the Gophers winning a national championship in this era would rank up there with Indiana’s coronation. So, yeah, we’re telling you there’s a chance because the Hoosiers proved it can be done. For the Gophers to one day catch such lightning in a bottle, they’ll need several things to align perfectly. Following the Hoosiers’ lead, at least in these areas, would be a start:

https://www.startribune.com/gophers-football-pj-fleck-indiana-curt-cignetti-fernando-mendoza-college-football-playoff/601575486

Go Gophers!!

 

[Some guy]

Love this article.
No one has thought of this before

 

[FredCoxRocks]

Love this article.
No one has thought of this before

Hey, they gotta give the sad, angry Strib commenters some fodder now and then to keep the clicks coming.

 

[caliGopher]

Love this article.
No one has thought of this before

Feels more like a plant from the Fleck PR Machine. As Fleck said, just because you want it doesn't mean it will happen.

Changing the Coach
We'll see how UCLA does with that recipe next season, but aside from that, finding a coach that can COACH, instill a winning mentality and expectation at every level of the FOOTBALL program, build a TEAM with a core of James Madison and Indiana recruits (NOT top-rated classes), very judicious portal pickups, and seamlessly navigate the new college football world and win isn't as easy as Cignetti has made it seem. As much as I think PJ uses the word Elite to describe what is average to slightly above or below average, changing the coach is the least of the problems the University of Minnesota has.

The real problem is the Administration
This article needed to be about a commitment to athletics, something that is happening at Indiana. It is not happening in Minnesota. Unless and until that mentality changes, changing coaches will get us where we are right now....Mason/Kill/Fleck being roughly equivalent (variations in results having more to do with the resources and relative situations than the coach), with the likelihood of Wacker or Brewster being more likely than Cignetti.

The big miss in this article is the admin's commitment to support athletics. Without it, the money won't flow as freely as it does in Indiana, now, because all of the big donors coming out of the woodwork are reacting to a change in the university's commitment. A basic of investments, don't sink money into a going concern if the proprietors are not committed to sustained growth. The real learning from Indiana is not go higher than a coach everyone has overlooked, it's make a commitment. Without it, an average to below average product on the field is ok, as long as there are no scandals

And ineptitude where it matters most.
The blurb about the investment in facilities neglected to mention that the spending got us up to date, not ahead of the game. Some of the bigger ticket items are taken care of, but they need to be maintained, upgraded, and led. In order to do that, you need two things. An AD that can pay off the spending to free up dollars for the next levels of investment, and an AD that boosters and the general public will follow. Our current AD is capable of neither, hell I'd settle for understanding the words that come out of his mouth. I think PJ wrote his own dictionary to pump up his worldview, ignoring what words actually mean. I wish Coyle could just be coherent, at a minimum.

So, yeah, this is a mailed-in article that doesn't actually talk about what needs to change at the U, it's a recipe on how to build a football team without any thought on the ingredients, the quality of the chefs, or the willingness to do what it takes. Unless those things change, mediocrity rises, which is how we've ended up where we are.

 

[MonikerSchmoniker45]

Feels more like a plant from the Fleck PR Machine. As Fleck said, just because you want it doesn't mean it will happen.

Changing the Coach
We'll see how UCLA does with that recipe next season, but aside from that, finding a coach that can COACH, instill a winning mentality and expectation at every level of the FOOTBALL program, build a TEAM with a core of James Madison and Indiana recruits (NOT top-rated classes), very judicious portal pickups, and seamlessly navigate the new college football world and win isn't as easy as Cignetti has made it seem. As much as I think PJ uses the word Elite to describe what is average to slightly above or below average, changing the coach is the least of the problems the University of Minnesota has.

The real problem is the Administration
This article needed to be about a commitment to athletics, something that is happening at Indiana. It is not happening in Minnesota. Unless and until that mentality changes, changing coaches will get us where we are right now....Mason/Kill/Fleck being roughly equivalent (variations in results having more to do with the resources and relative situations than the coach), with the likelihood of Wacker or Brewster being more likely than Cignetti.

The big miss in this article is the admin's commitment to support athletics. Without it, the money won't flow as freely as it does in Indiana, now, because all of the big donors coming out of the woodwork are reacting to a change in the university's commitment. A basic of investments, don't sink money into a going concern if the proprietors are not committed to sustained growth. The real learning from Indiana is not go higher than a coach everyone has overlooked, it's make a commitment. Without it, an average to below average product on the field is ok, as long as there are no scandals

And ineptitude where it matters most.
The blurb about the investment in facilities neglected to mention that the spending got us up to date, not ahead of the game. Some of the bigger ticket items are taken care of, but they need to be maintained, upgraded, and led. In order to do that, you need two things. An AD that can pay off the spending to free up dollars for the next levels of investment, and an AD that boosters and the general public will follow. Our current AD is capable of neither, hell I'd settle for understanding the words that come out of his mouth. I think PJ wrote his own dictionary to pump up his worldview, ignoring what words actually mean. I wish Coyle could just be coherent, at a minimum.

So, yeah, this is a mailed-in article that doesn't actually talk about what needs to change at the U, it's a recipe on how to build a football team without any thought on the ingredients, the quality of the chefs, or the willingness to do what it takes. Unless those things change, mediocrity rises, which is how we've ended up where we are.

This is delusional. Indiana has a billionaire backing them.... that's all that needs to be said.

 

[Some guy]

Feels more like a plant from the Fleck PR Machine. As Fleck said, just because you want it doesn't mean it will happen.

Changing the Coach
We'll see how UCLA does with that recipe next season, but aside from that, finding a coach that can COACH, instill a winning mentality and expectation at every level of the FOOTBALL program, build a TEAM with a core of James Madison and Indiana recruits (NOT top-rated classes), very judicious portal pickups, and seamlessly navigate the new college football world and win isn't as easy as Cignetti has made it seem. As much as I think PJ uses the word Elite to describe what is average to slightly above or below average, changing the coach is the least of the problems the University of Minnesota has.

The real problem is the Administration
This article needed to be about a commitment to athletics, something that is happening at Indiana. It is not happening in Minnesota. Unless and until that mentality changes, changing coaches will get us where we are right now....Mason/Kill/Fleck being roughly equivalent (variations in results having more to do with the resources and relative situations than the coach), with the likelihood of Wacker or Brewster being more likely than Cignetti.

The big miss in this article is the admin's commitment to support athletics. Without it, the money won't flow as freely as it does in Indiana, now, because all of the big donors coming out of the woodwork are reacting to a change in the university's commitment. A basic of investments, don't sink money into a going concern if the proprietors are not committed to sustained growth. The real learning from Indiana is not go higher than a coach everyone has overlooked, it's make a commitment. Without it, an average to below average product on the field is ok, as long as there are no scandals

And ineptitude where it matters most.
The blurb about the investment in facilities neglected to mention that the spending got us up to date, not ahead of the game. Some of the bigger ticket items are taken care of, but they need to be maintained, upgraded, and led. In order to do that, you need two things. An AD that can pay off the spending to free up dollars for the next levels of investment, and an AD that boosters and the general public will follow. Our current AD is capable of neither, hell I'd settle for understanding the words that come out of his mouth. I think PJ wrote his own dictionary to pump up his worldview, ignoring what words actually mean. I wish Coyle could just be coherent, at a minimum.

So, yeah, this is a mailed-in article that doesn't actually talk about what needs to change at the U, it's a recipe on how to build a football team without any thought on the ingredients, the quality of the chefs, or the willingness to do what it takes. Unless those things change, mediocrity rises, which is how we've ended up where we are.

If it’s a plant from Fleck PR it’s the dumbest plant of all time

Why would fleck PR want to highlight the dozen or so coaches who have done more with less than he has?

Fleck PR should bring up Fickell, Lincoln Riley, Rhule, etc

 

[MNVCGUY]

This is delusional. Indiana has a billionaire backing them.... that's all that needs to be said.

He makes some solid points but yeah you can't just gloss over this part of the Indiana equation. It is true they aren't going out and loading up on the highest rated talent but they have the financial backing to go get the players they want.

A good eye for talent you need to make your systems go, combined with the resources to get those players goes a long way.

 

[mngg11]

If it’s a plant from Fleck PR it’s the dumbest plant of all time

Why would fleck PR want to highlight the dozen or so coaches who have done more with less than he has?

Fleck PR should bring up Fickell, Lincoln Riley, Rhule, etc

I did my best! Apparently I need to change it

 

[Some guy]

I did my best! Apparently I need to change it

I’m just saying shouldn’t any planted story by fleck essentially point to all the terribleness to make fleck look good.

There are only 15-20 cases in the country where you’re like dang they’re doing more than Mn with the same or fewer resources

One of those is Indiana (and they have more resources)
One of those is SMU
One of those was maybe Iowa state (and they lost their coach)

Etc

 

[mngg11]

I’m just saying shouldn’t any planted story by fleck essentially point to all the terribleness to make fleck look good.

There are only 15-20 cases in the country where you’re like dang they’re doing more than Mn with the same or fewer resources

One of those is Indiana (and they have more resources)
One of those is SMU
One of those was maybe Iowa state (and they lost their coach)

Etc

Oh no, you're good and understood. I'm just having fun with a particular group of the gopherhole population who get in a kerfuffle when there's any positivity or defense directed towards Fleck and the way he runs his program. I wouldn't be a very good Heather if I let some of these comments slide!

On a side note, SMU is another program with deep pockets (not to the extent of Indiana, though)

 

[UpAndUnder43]

I’m just saying shouldn’t any planted story by fleck essentially point to all the terribleness to make fleck look good.

There are only 15-20 cases in the country where you’re like dang they’re doing more than Mn with the same or fewer resources

One of those is Indiana (and they have more resources)
One of those is SMU
One of those was maybe Iowa state (and they lost their coach)

Etc

15-20 seems awfully high.

 

[Some guy]

15-20 seems awfully high.

15-20 if you count Indiana and SMU types. Fewer if you say they have way more money than Mn

 

[UpAndUnder43]

15-20 if you count Indiana and SMU types. Fewer if you say they have way more money than Mn

I don’t think 15-20 similar programs are doing better than Minnesota but maybe?

 

[Some guy]

I don’t think 15-20 similar programs are doing better than Minnesota but maybe?

Quickly off top of my head
Duke
Pitt
Iowa
Indiana
SMU
Iowa state
Utah
Missouri
Arizona state

Kinda depends on if you’re saying 3 year period or 6 or 10 or whatever




In the comparison you run into what you always run into. What’s better?

8-4
8-4
5-7
7-5
7-5
Or
3-9
8-4
8-4
9-3
9-3
And one of the 9-3 is a conference title but in a clearly worse conference

 

[GO4FAN5]

The old saying goes 'you win with players' In this day and age if you ain't got the money to buy 'em you ain't goin' anywhere.

 

[Some guy]

The old saying goes 'you win with players' In this day and age if you ain't got the money to buy 'em you ain't goin' anywhere.

That’s true. But you can also get better players by buying players that are better for the money.

Indiana isn’t winning by being top 5 in spending.
They’re winning by being top 20 in spending and the best at matching their scouting to their system so they can develop.

One guy might develop into a 3rd round pick anywhere he goes. But in one system he would be an all American player and in another system he would be a good player.
Same player, better system fit = better player

 

[caliGopher]

He makes some solid points but yeah you can't just gloss over this part of the Indiana equation. It is true they aren't going out and loading up on the highest rated talent but they have the financial backing to go get the players they want.

A good eye for talent you need to make your systems go, combined with the resources to get those players goes a long way.

I didn't try to gloss over that factor, but my thinking is this: I'm not a billionaire, but if I were, there is no way I'd spend what Mark Cuban is at Minnesota with the current administration's mentality in place.

What I believe is this: It's easier to find a Sugar Daddy (or a few if you lack billionaires) willing to put money into the system when the system is committed to results on the field.

 

[MNVCGUY]

I didn't try to gloss over that factor, but my thinking is this: I'm not a billionaire, but if I were, there is no way I'd spend what Mark Cuban is at Minnesota with the current administration's mentality in place.

What I believe is this: It's easier to find a Sugar Daddy (or a few if you lack billionaires) willing to put money into the system when the system is committed to results on the field.

No arguments there. Has been a perfect storm of everything coming together for Indiana to do what they have done.

Many teams will attempt to duplicate it and most likely nearly all of them will fail.