Those that know, the people that follow recruiting, think you are wrong. They think that Brewster has done a remarkable job of recruiting here. Think it is easy to recruit to a metro university with the worst winters in Div 1 football and 40 years of losing? Think again.
Brewster = vastly over-rated recruiter?
- Thread starter ConferenceChamp
- Start date
Those that know, the people that follow recruiting, think you are wrong. They think that Brewster has done a remarkable job of recruiting here. Think it is easy to recruit to a metro university with the worst winters in Div 1 football and 40 years of losing? Think again.
GophersInIowa
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2008
- Messages
- 43,817
- Reaction score
- 26,148
- Points
- 113
It may not be tough to get good players at places like Texas, Oklahoma, and Florida but it's still tough to get those elite players like Vince Young, Adrian Peterson, and Reggie Bush. It's not like Texas was going against Iowa St., Kent St., and Colorado when they landed Vince Young. They still had to battle with the likes of Florida State (who were considered a top program at that time) and LSU to get him.
The best way to judge Brew as a recruiter is what the team does on the field the next two years when his classes are upperclassmen. If we're still winning 6 or 7 games with those guys, then he probably is overrated.
If signing day were today, I fail to see how we're showing improvement as you look from '08-'10... Enough of the comparison with Mason. Can we judge Brewster on what he's delivering at this point?
count much?
You are kidding, right?
You fail to see how 6th and 3rd are better than 9th and 10th?
You are kidding, right?
You fail to see how 6th and 3rd are better than 9th and 10th?
Re-read my post...
I think everyone needs to let the rankings on Scout, Rivals, and ESPN go.
There are enough youtube and highlight videos to see all of these recruits in action.
Watch the tapes and then see how the recruits look.
The targets of this class point to building depth over immediate impact. There are more projects and long term development types than day one starters.
2007-What was our greatest weakness? Offensive and defensive speed.
Recruits:
The 08 class had a ton of speedy defensive players and guys who could come in and immediately contribute on the both sides of the ball.
2008-What was our greatest weakness? Quality depth. Pittman was brought in to allow Gray to RS and develop, neither worked out like was hoped in 08. Young players were plentiful and got a chance to play, but only Stoudemire was impactful. The offensive line was beaten up every game. Key players got hurt down the road resulting in a collapse late in the year.
Recruits:
09 class had immediate impact guys like Carter, Wills, Lipscomb, and Carpenter that were supposed to fill in and displace depth issues such as Bennett, Decker, and Sherels getting hurt in 08. The majority of freshmen were allowed to RS, mature and grow. This will help eliminate quality depth issues down the road. Across the board quality football players sat this year to help improve this program in 2010-2013. Thus finally eliminating the depth gap the 05, 06, 07 classes put in this program. Along with the lack of redshirts in the 08 class out of necessity.
Seriously look at those classes and then look at how many RS upperclassmen will start next year. In 2013 there will not be the same problem.
2009-What was our greatest weakness? Obviously Carpenter and Lipscomb didn't work out. Wills was average to solid, but the offensive line was suspect all year. A senior laden defense played well, but graduated. The running game was ineffective and the passing game struggled to click.
Recruits:
The 2010 class is specifically recruited to address a few concerns, namely offensive line quality and defensive secondary depth. Also to try and find a runningback to hang the program's hat on.
Emphasis was put on these three positions along with a responsible number of linebackers, wide receivers, and defensive linemen. Again the majority will RS and develop. This will give another group of talented players a chance to solidify the program from 2011 to 2014.
It's not as flashy as some may hope, but every recruit has a purpose, take a step back, analyze and I think most will see the direction the recruiting has been under this regime.
There are enough youtube and highlight videos to see all of these recruits in action.
Watch the tapes and then see how the recruits look.
The targets of this class point to building depth over immediate impact. There are more projects and long term development types than day one starters.
2007-What was our greatest weakness? Offensive and defensive speed.
Recruits:
The 08 class had a ton of speedy defensive players and guys who could come in and immediately contribute on the both sides of the ball.
2008-What was our greatest weakness? Quality depth. Pittman was brought in to allow Gray to RS and develop, neither worked out like was hoped in 08. Young players were plentiful and got a chance to play, but only Stoudemire was impactful. The offensive line was beaten up every game. Key players got hurt down the road resulting in a collapse late in the year.
Recruits:
09 class had immediate impact guys like Carter, Wills, Lipscomb, and Carpenter that were supposed to fill in and displace depth issues such as Bennett, Decker, and Sherels getting hurt in 08. The majority of freshmen were allowed to RS, mature and grow. This will help eliminate quality depth issues down the road. Across the board quality football players sat this year to help improve this program in 2010-2013. Thus finally eliminating the depth gap the 05, 06, 07 classes put in this program. Along with the lack of redshirts in the 08 class out of necessity.
Seriously look at those classes and then look at how many RS upperclassmen will start next year. In 2013 there will not be the same problem.
2009-What was our greatest weakness? Obviously Carpenter and Lipscomb didn't work out. Wills was average to solid, but the offensive line was suspect all year. A senior laden defense played well, but graduated. The running game was ineffective and the passing game struggled to click.
Recruits:
The 2010 class is specifically recruited to address a few concerns, namely offensive line quality and defensive secondary depth. Also to try and find a runningback to hang the program's hat on.
Emphasis was put on these three positions along with a responsible number of linebackers, wide receivers, and defensive linemen. Again the majority will RS and develop. This will give another group of talented players a chance to solidify the program from 2011 to 2014.
It's not as flashy as some may hope, but every recruit has a purpose, take a step back, analyze and I think most will see the direction the recruiting has been under this regime.
Speaking of Rivals ratings, the kid that got the scholarship offer from the Badgers over Epping and Eggan was finally rated on Rivals. His name is Dallas Lewallen and he is a 5.6 three star.
Epping and Eggen are 5.5 three stars.
It seems the Badgers coaching staff knew what they were doing all along and Rivals finally figured it out also.
And the award for most irrevelant post of the day goes to.........
Hey Iceland-
You can check the link below to see who came in 7th place (out of nearly 200 'Holer contestants)
BTW, thanks to our resident Snowman (Rick Mons) for providing the entertainment.
Can't accuse me of being a Kool-Aid drinker
or in having a lot of faith in the direction of the football program, under the current head coach.
http://www.forums.gopherhole.com/boards/showthread.php?t=13275
Well that's certainly true.
GoAUpher
Section 246
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2008
- Messages
- 6,256
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 36
Don't even bother suggesting it. There is no talking with him unless you +1 his point.
Meanwhile, I'm confused as to what we're supposed to look at then. I understand what you are asking (judge Brew on his own merits) but judge him how? To judge him using overall class rating/rating of class within the Big 10 you have to consider the program's strength (e.g. a 4th ranked B10 class would be a step down for OSU but a pretty good ranking for MN, WI, Iowa). Since rankings are relatively new that means comparisons to Mason. It is inevitable.
If you are going to judge Brew on his own merits you do it using the number of wins and losses he's accrued.
I certainly agree that the overall class rankings are showing a downward trend. But that also corresponds to the failure to get over the hump with wins too. Also, with this shaping up to be the lowest rated of Brew's 3 classes, it is still no worse than on par with an "average" MN class over the last decade. There is no denying that point.
50PoundHead
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2008
- Messages
- 8,690
- Reaction score
- 1,839
- Points
- 113
Speaking of Rivals ratings, the kid that got the scholarship offer from the Badgers over Epping and Eggan was finally rated on Rivals. His name is Dallas Lewallen and he is a 5.6 three star.
Epping and Eggen are 5.5 three stars.
It seems the Badgers coaching staff knew what they were doing all along and Rivals finally figured it out also.
Nice to see Mr. "I Don't Believe in Stars" is now spouting the methodology when it's "his" recruit that's involved.
You missed the point of the post. The point was all the people using Rivals ratings as an indication that the Badgers in state recruiting was falling apart were proven wrong because the recruit that took the scholarship offer from Epping and Eggen is now rated higher then they are. Maybe the Wisconsin coaches knew what they were doing. In the end, the players will make that determination over the next 5 years.
The reality is that there is no way you can predict based on a highly subjective rating of a player in the range of 5.5-5.7 who is going to have the best college career. There are far to many factors involved and it is an excercise of futility. The notion that a 5.7 player is going to better then a 5.6 or 5.5 player is ridiculous.
The rating of the three players will not determine how hard they are going to work, how they will do in school, whether they are a good fit for the system or how well they will be coached.
Stars can be a very general guide to how a school may be recruiting. Comparing classes and ranking them and then determining someone is recruiting better because their classes average a 32 rating compared to others that average a 42 rating is absurd.
50PoundHead
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2008
- Messages
- 8,690
- Reaction score
- 1,839
- Points
- 113
Just keep spinning it. My point that you've contradicted yourself on just about everything you've said up to this point about the rankings of recruits.
Your point is incorrect and there is no spin. My position has never changed.
Okay, I have a question: How did this thread go from "Brewster is overrated as a recruiter" into "the Badger coaches are doing a good job of recruiting Wisconsin kids"? Now all we need is somebody to talk about how well Kirk Ferentz recruits Iowa kids and we'll have all our bases covered.
littlebigboy
Member
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2008
- Messages
- 902
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 16
I guess we will find out in the next few yrs. how good a recruiter he is. When his recruits become 3-4-5th yr players, can they win. That will be the determining factor whether he can recruit or not. Not some star system. Alot of recruiting has to do with a kids heart and work ethic, not only skill. Some kids are 6'5" 215 as Srs. in HS and are pretty matured physically and some are 6'5" and 215 and hardly shave. 3-4 yrs. can make a world of difference!! WAIT AND SEE AND QUIT ALL THE SPECULATION!
Okay, I have a question: How did this thread go from "Brewster is overrated as a recruiter" into "the Badger coaches are doing a good job of recruiting Wisconsin kids"? Now all we need is somebody to talk about how well Kirk Ferentz recruits Iowa kids and we'll have all our bases covered.
That is a good question. Since the thread was about Rivals Ratings and whether Brewster is a good recruiter, I thought I would add an example about ratings which had been discussed on the board as it related to a couple of kids Minnesota has committed.
I don't think there is any question that "recruiting" has improved under Brewster at Minnesota. Whether he is "out recruiting" anyone else is pure conjecture and ultimately is only decided on the field.
Anybody that expected him to come in and land top ten classes and be ranked ahead of OSU, PSU or Michigan in the Big Ten in "recruiting" lives in fantasy land. It will never happen. To say he is not being successful "recruiting" because he has not done that is ridiculous.
He is clearly bringing in deeper classes and higher rated players then Mason did. The question is can he win with them. You still need to beat the big boys in the Big Ten to accomplish the goal of winning the Big Ten. You are not going to do it by "out recruiting" them in the traditional sense.
Logically, he should get the chance to build a winning team as his recruits mature. Ole has stated the argument for this position rather eloquently. Unfortunately, the only thing to go on is faith, there is no guarantee.
However, I can understand why people think he may not be able to do it. There are signs that he is not up to the task. Whether it is fair to judge him based on those perceived signs is the question.
That is why there is so much angst in Gopher Nation right now. I actually think both sides make compelling arguments.
No problem. I was just funning with you a little bit. But otherwise, I agree. There are certainly compelling arguments both ways in debates such as this one. As you noted, bringing in better talent is just one part of the equation. The second part is making sure they live up to their potential on the field, which I guess is the real issue people are having when it comes to Brewster.
The bottom line for me is this: The Gophers are losing several key players between this year and next. As such, many of Brewster's recruits will be counted on to fill those spots, which is why next year is vital to his future at Minnesota imo. We'll be able to get a better feel not only for what kind of recruiter he is, but also what kind of developer of talent.