College Football News: Minnesota & P.J. Fleck Ready To Row To A Big Ten Title?

Donate To GopherHole
short ornery norwegian said:
It will be fascinating to watch the week-by-week reaction to this team during the season. It's just weird to me that the posters who are among the biggest Fleck supporters tend to be less optimistic about this year's team, and the people who are more skeptical of Fleck seem to be more optimistic about the team's prospects.

For the record - I am NOT trying to set up some false scenario so that I can rip Fleck if the team doesn't live up to my expectations. If I say I think the team can win 8 games this year, that means I think the team can win 8 games. I have one agenda - I want to see the Gophers have a good season. I have that same agenda whether the coach is named Fleck, Claeys, or Elmer Fudd.

I hope that everyone can just put aside all the BS this fall and support the team. If the Gophers win, I would hope that the Fleck people and the Claeys people can be equally happy. And if the Gophers don't win, I hope we can keep the second-guessing and name-calling to a minimum. Let's try to focus on what happens on the field.
Click to expand...

Anyone who would blast Fleck after his first season needs his head examined.
 

GopherHomer said:
....
Okay - as to the part in bold, let's talk about this. You constantly make this claim, and I agree with you - but what does that mean? Are we trying to win the MAC? Pretty much every Big10 has more talent than any MAC team...both the former coaches of Purdue and Illinois probably walked into more talent than they had on their MAC rosters and they failed. In no way do I think this is a complete rebuild, and over the last 4 years I believe the Gophers have had the talent to go undefeated in the MAC. Under our previous regime, we were able to accumulate the talent of a very high-end MAC team and be a respectable, middling Big10 team. My personal hope for Fleck is that, over time, he can elevate the recruiting to be maybe top 5/6 in the conference and be an actual factor in the championship discussion...ala wisconsin.

You claim that Fleck and his staff are better at coaching, developing talent, and recruiting (which I don't really believe you believe) but even if that is the case, it will take time to show results. I'll even say that I think the staff of Kill/Claeys/Sawvel might have been the better trio in straight-up coaching, but they just weren't able/willing to put in the time to bring in the amount of talent requisite to competing in a major conference. They were perfect for what we needed at the time (as we were an embarrassment) but not up to the task of taking us to the next level. Fleck is the TYPE of guy to do that. We will see over the course of the next 3-5 seasons if he is able to - but Claeys was going to maintain the level we were at: an occasional 8 win season among some 5 win campaigns.
Click to expand...



Fleck's scheme takes a type of player to be successful...he has said it multiple times...the scheme is simple/basic, the right type of player makes it go when executed at a high level. He did not have that type walking into WMU. The recruiting classes he brought in where not ranked markedly higher than his predecessor, and some were lower, so type was critical to his recruiting not just the best athlete. At the U, the types of players he needs are already on the roster, as he has stated. You are absolutely right, this is a lot higher level than the MAC in just about every way.

I bring up the talent thing because even though that is apparent to you, me, and many others; some posters have strongly disagreed, and are using that to make the argument that he needs a few classes to get the right type of player talent for his scheme. It is just not true. Fleck's got them now, and at a higher talent level.

I have said Fleck and staff are perceived as better. Coyle certainly thinks so given what he paid to get Fleck on board, many CFB publications and writers do as well. I'm saying that if that is the case, as many are saying, expectations of 8 regular season wins this year are very realistic, given what Fleck walked into as far as talent, facilities, and support. I do believe that because he is an offensively minded HC who has demonstrated success on that side of the ball, the overall offense will be noticeably better under Fleck this year. That might not be saying much given the overall performance of it last year, but it certainly is enough for me to think he can match last year in wins. I expected that of TC and crew before MC canned them.

I have posted many times that Fleck is not going anywhere soon. I expect if he lives up to the billing, he will have the opportunity in 2019 to have 10+ regular season wins with a shot at getting the Gophs to the Rose Bowl. If that happens, Fleck will be here a long time and I will enjoy every moment. Time will tell, but there is nothing for me that points to a let down or step back in wins.
 


short ornery norwegian said:
It will be fascinating to watch the week-by-week reaction to this team during the season. It's just weird to me that the posters who are among the biggest Fleck supporters tend to be less optimistic about this year's team, and the people who are more skeptical of Fleck seem to be more optimistic about the team's prospects.
Click to expand...

I think it's a matter of perspective. To some, 7 wins would be a colossal failure. To others like myself it would be a fine first season. That doesn't mean I'm not optimistic about the team, but I won't hold him to some unrealistic standard in his first season as a measure of my support for the staff. My belief that Fleck is building a good program here isn't tied to the number of first-year wins, so why should I try to put some type of mandate on what would determine a successful season?
 



GopherWeatherGuy said:
Both Utah and especially TCU have recruited at a much higher level than the Gophers. Boise St isn't in the P5 but they have still recruited similarly or slightly better than the Gophers. Those are poor comparisons.

I've already agreed with your second paragraph that it takes both coaching and talent.
Click to expand...

During Urban's tenure at Utah he was working with the 78th ranked class in 2001, 51st in 2002 and 97th in 2003. You're correct in saying the comparison is poor- Urban was successful with much less talent.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 



Oregon Gopher said:
During Urban's tenure at Utah he was working with the 78th ranked class in 2001, 51st in 2002 and 97th in 2003. You're correct in saying the comparison is poor- Urban was successful with much less talent.
Click to expand...

He was also playing against a Mountain West schedule at the time. Traveling to Wyoming or New Mexico is slightly different from traveling to Michigan or Ohio State.
 



joshvanklomp said:
He was also playing against a Mountain West schedule at the time. Traveling to Wyoming or New Mexico is slightly different from traveling to Michigan or Ohio State.
Click to expand...

True but the MW was a pretty decent conference in its hey-day. And the point was he was able to beat (and often destroy) good-excellent Texas A&M, Cal, Oregon, Southern Miss, BYU and Pitt teams with lowly ranked talent.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

ruppertflywheel said:
Anyone who would blast Fleck after his first season needs his head examined.
Click to expand...
Kinda like those who blasted Claeys after his first season? Yet, people were haters of Claeys throughout his first (and only) season despite his team winning 9 games.

Sorry, ruppert, but if Fleck screws up the gift horse he's inherited, it's all on Fleck for the screw up. This year's team should win 8 games, minimum.
 


joshvanklomp said:
I think it's a matter of perspective. To some, 7 wins would be a colossal failure. To others like myself it would be a fine first season. That doesn't mean I'm not optimistic about the team, <b>but I won't hold him to some unrealistic standard </b>in his first season as a measure of my support for the staff. My belief that Fleck is building a good program here isn't tied to the number of first-year wins, so why should I try to put some type of mandate on what would determine a successful season?
Click to expand...

Unrealistic? What is an unrealistic number of wins this year? Over 7?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 



Spoofin said:
Unrealistic? What is an unrealistic number of wins this year? Over 7?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Well considering over 7 would match the third-most wins in a season since 1905....yes I think it's unrealistic to hold him to that standard in order to continue my support for the staff and the program.
 

joshvanklomp said:
Well considering over 7 would match the third-most wins in a season since 1905....yes I think it's unrealistic to hold him to that standard in order to continue my support for the staff and the program.
Click to expand...

Well, maybe I misunderstood. Considering 8-wins this year to be unrealistic is foolish. Pulling support for PJF and the program if they don't win 8 this year would be far more foolish. I'll be disappointed if we don't win 8 as I think we will start 7-0 - but I certainly wouldn't pull my support if we don't meet that. Heck, I stayed strong thru the Brewster years......


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

ruppertflywheel said:
Anyone who would blast Fleck after his first season needs his head examined.
Click to expand...

If the Gophers were to win 2, 1 or no games this year, then you would need your head examined if you didn't blast him.
Highly doubt that the Gophers will be in that win range, but to say he is completely off limits regardless of what happens this year is a preposterous statement.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom