Ellstad is trash

Donate To GopherHole
If we had anyone better, he'd be doing the kicking. Would you really like the Gophers second best option to be kicking field goals? If he's the best kicker we have available, it's not his fault that a better kicker wasn't recruited. With the size of the student body at the U, it's likely that there is someone who was a kicker in high school, but even so, it's unlikely that there would be anyone better than Ellestead.
 

Nobody is trash. Human Garbage? Come on, he has had his struggles, but NOBODY deserves to be called that.
 

Breakin' The Plane said:
And this is what is wrong with this fanbase. If somebody woefully underperforms at a top school, the fanbase savages him. If it happens here, someone will rush to his defense and play the "he's a good kid who tries his best" card.
Click to expand...


Thank you. My point on the Weber topic before. I direct you to the GPL board form last nights game for real criticism.
 

Who can defend any of our kickers? If you are a parent of one of the kids you shoul be grateful that your family got a scholarship. Ellestad and what's his face are horrible. I can't believe there aren't walk-ons who kick better then these two putzes. If they're upset with criticism they need to grow a pair. And you pollyanna idiots who drink the kool-aid should go away too. You're more harm than good to the U program.
 



I agree that calling the kid garbage is weak, calling his kicking garbage is just fine with me, because it is. Might be the worst kicker I have seen at the U since the 80's (as far back as I can remember).
 

50PoundHead said:
Ellestad even.

But you can understand Brewster's recruiting of Kip Smith now. Oh, that darn Goldy and his sacrilegious mockery!
Click to expand...

The great Kipper has apparently red shirted. He is so good, they are saving him for the NC next year.
 

The really funny thing is that this is the guy that Brewster insisted would have kicked the game tying or winning FG against Northwestern (I believe). LOL, all we needed to do is run the ball 19 times with 2 minutes left to get him in position to kick a 47 yarder when he can't even hit 20 yard FGs.
 




I hate to say I told you so...

RodentRampage said:
If we had anyone better, he'd be doing the kicking. Would you really like the Gophers second best option to be kicking field goals? If he's the best kicker we have available, it's not his fault that a better kicker wasn't recruited. With the size of the student body at the U, it's likely that there is someone who was a kicker in high school, but even so, it's unlikely that there would be anyone better than Ellestead.
Click to expand...

Without touching on the issue of the impropriety of calling a 22 year old trash (a poor choice of wording imho, but lighten up, Frances)...

Last recruiting season I raised the question of why don't we recruit a blue chip kicker. All the recruitniks and self-proclaimed experts slapped me down, saying how "anyone who knows football knows you bring in walk-ons, and then award them a scholarship". Or "you recruit a kid if you have a schollie left over". Gee, that's worked out so well for us. We might as well have tryouts from the English department. Sort of like that George Plimpton Book "Paper Lion". Kick for the Gophers for a season, and then write a 10 page paper on it. You get 2 credits.

Why coaches don't spend more time recruiting the one kid who provides 25-33% of the team's points is a total mystery to me. Someone please explain.
 

Too Long in the Wasteland said:
Why coaches don't spend more time recruiting the one kid who provides 25-33% of the team's points is a total mystery to me. Someone please explain.
Click to expand...

This isn't a valid criticism of the Brewster regime - as mentioned earlier in the thread, we DID recruit a blue chip kicker. He backed out. And Orseske was also a blue chip recruit. Yes, he's had a really lousy year, but it doesn't change the fact that he was highly sought after.

However, I do agree with the general sentiment you're expressing. It has always driven me nuts how teams don't put enough of a priority on getting great kickers and punters. I'd always have 3 or 4 scholarships allocated for those positions, along with as many walk-ons as I could find.
 

minibeaver said:
I hope the administrators delete this thread. Why you would postsomethimg like thatabout one of our kids tells me all I need to know about you as fan. Take your negativity somewhere else. Up your a$$ sounds like a good place for it. We don't need fans like you. Do the program and the rest of us a favor and never post here again.
Click to expand...

I'm sick of people referring to college men as kids. They are not kids. They are playing Division I football and scrutiny comes with the territory.
 

Go Gophers Rah said:
+1 on deleting this thread.

Its okay to say that Ellestad's kicking is trash. It is not okay to say that Ellestad himself is trash.

You (the original poster) are on your sofa eating junk food and criticizing a team of student-athletes. He is out there under difficult circumstances performing very poorly.
Of the two, I would say you are the trash.
Click to expand...

Think you might be taking him a little too literally. Obviously, he meant Ellestad is trash as a player. No person who gave his post more than two seconds thought concluded that he meant that Ellestad is a person of no value.
 



jason said:
I'm sick of people referring to college men as kids. They are not kids. They are playing Division I football and scrutiny comes with the territory.
Click to expand...

+1.

The compensation these young men are receiving to play football make them a fair target for under-performance.
 

jason said:
Think you might be taking him a little too literally. Obviously, he meant Ellestad is trash as a player. No person who gave his post more than two seconds thought concluded that he meant that Ellestad is a person of no value.
Click to expand...

Thank you I also thought this would be more obvious. He was clearly referencing his kicking abilities.
________
New mexico marijuana dispensaries
 


I question the intelligence of anybody who read the title & immediately believed the TS was talking about Ellistad as a person...
 

This thread should Be deleted and if the initial poster so chooses he can start a separate thread on the state of the kicking game with a more civil title.
 



The Whole college rating stars is a complete joke! Go back and look at the four and five stars from four or five years ago and you will find they star rankings are useless in the end. They top ten players are clear and easy to rank because they are usually running a 4.3 or 6'9 325 in high school and any moron could see they will be good in college. Why does it take a stupid company like rivals to trick coaches into thinking they have a great recruiting class?? What a pointless complete joke of a job the guys at rivals have. I seriously feel sorry for someone who devotes their professional career to giving high school kids "star rankings"
 

gophers2rosebowl said:
The Whole college rating stars is a complete joke! Go back and look at the four and five stars from four or five years ago and you will find they star rankings are useless in the end. They top ten players are clear and easy to rank because they are usually running a 4.3 or 6'9 325 in high school and any moron could see they will be good in college. Why does it take a stupid company like rivals to trick coaches into thinking they have a great recruiting class?? What a pointless complete joke of a job the guys at rivals have. I seriously feel sorry for someone who devotes their professional career to giving high school kids "star rankings"
Click to expand...

This post is false in virtually every respect.
 

gophers2rosebowl said:
The Whole college rating stars is a complete joke! Go back and look at the four and five stars from four or five years ago and you will find they star rankings are useless in the end. They top ten players are clear and easy to rank because they are usually running a 4.3 or 6'9 325 in high school and any moron could see they will be good in college. Why does it take a stupid company like rivals to trick coaches into thinking they have a great recruiting class?? What a pointless complete joke of a job the guys at rivals have. I seriously feel sorry for someone who devotes their professional career to giving high school kids "star rankings"
Click to expand...

Here's a way to test your hypothesis that the recruit ratings are useless: Get a list of the teams from the best team to the worst team. Then match each team with their recruit rankings. If you are right, you should find no correlation between how good a team is and the ratings of the recuits. But there is a correlation, if a school has higher rated recruiting classes, they tend to do better on the field.

And it's not true that "any moron" can tell who the good players are. A fast time in the 40 or being big tell you something, but not as much as you might think. Coaches go to a lot of effort to scout players, if any moron can do it, then why do coaches go to such effort?
 

gophers2rosebowl said:
The Whole college rating stars is a complete joke! Go back and look at the four and five stars from four or five years ago and you will find they star rankings are useless in the end. They top ten players are clear and easy to rank because they are usually running a 4.3 or 6'9 325 in high school and any moron could see they will be good in college. Why does it take a stupid company like rivals to trick coaches into thinking they have a great recruiting class?? What a pointless complete joke of a job the guys at rivals have. I seriously feel sorry for someone who devotes their professional career to giving high school kids "star rankings"
Click to expand...

I give you Mitch Mustain: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitch_Mustain
 

Visibility

Unfortunately for Ellestad and Orseske, their performance is largely a visibility issue.

If you were evaluating individual performances, there are probably 15-20 people on the roster who have performed as poorly or even more poorly than these guys. It just so happens that their poor performances are entirely too easy for the average fan to spot.

Orseske puzzles me. By all accounts, he can boom the ball. I don't understand why he's had such a poor season. That being said, he could easily be fine next year and be one of the better punters in the conference. He's young with a lot of time left.

Ellestad's issue is confidence, plain and simple. I have no doubt he has the skill to kick in the Big Ten. He's just missed a few too many kicks and for his position, that's tough to recover from if you don't have the right mental makeup. The problem is, the situation feeds itself and it becomes worse as the season progresses; kicker misses a few kicks, coaching staff starts to go for it on 4th down a few times because they don't trust the kicker, the kicker sees this and it wears on his confidence knowing that the coaches don't trust him, etc. The situation perpetuates itself.


There are literally hundreds of guys who have the leg and the talent to kick at the NFL level. There aren't more than a couple dozen who have what it takes between the ears.
 

gophers2rosebowl said:
The Whole college rating stars is a complete joke! Go back and look at the four and five stars from four or five years ago and you will find they star rankings are useless in the end. They top ten players are clear and easy to rank because they are usually running a 4.3 or 6'9 325 in high school and any moron could see they will be good in college. Why does it take a stupid company like rivals to trick coaches into thinking they have a great recruiting class?? What a pointless complete joke of a job the guys at rivals have. I seriously feel sorry for someone who devotes their professional career to giving high school kids "star rankings"
Click to expand...

I don't believe they are the end-all and be-all, but you can't make chicken salad out of chicken $h1t. The teams that get the better kids are usually the ones that do better on the field. Sure, you still have to coach them up and the best HS pro-style QB probably can't run the spread, but if you have a good idea of what schemes you want to run and are successful recruiting the most athletic/skilled kids that fit those schemes, you're likely to have a pretty good team.
 

dpodoll68 said:
This post is false in virtually every respect.
Click to expand...

if im wrong then please explain where all these big time recruits brewster got as such a "recruiter" . The fact is he recruited players that had a star next to their name from some joe blow working at rivals. He did not look behind the stupid ratings for such things as ACADEMICS or CHARACTER. Look at the walk ons that did great things and had no stars or never had a look from rivals?????
 

gophers2rosebowl said:
if im wrong then please explain where all these big time recruits brewster got as such a "recruiter" . The fact is he recruited players that had a star next to their name from some joe blow working at rivals. He did not look behind the stupid ratings for such things as ACADEMICS or CHARACTER. Look at the walk ons that did great things and had no stars or never had a look from rivals?????
Click to expand...

You can find an exception to almost any rule. It doesn't always make the rule false.
 

gophers2rosebowl said:
if im wrong then please explain where all these big time recruits brewster got as such a "recruiter" . The fact is he recruited players that had a star next to their name from some joe blow working at rivals. He did not look behind the stupid ratings for such things as ACADEMICS or CHARACTER. Look at the walk ons that did great things and had no stars or never had a look from rivals?????
Click to expand...

Again, take a look at the teams from the best to the worst, and look at their recruit ratings. If you are right, there would be no correlation between success on the field and recruit ratings. But there is a correlation.

And in any case, Brewster did have a good recruiting class in his first year of recruiting (not counting 2007 where he came on only a couple weeks before signing day), but his recruit rankings have significantly declined.

The ratings aren't stupid. Examine the facts.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom