ESPN: B1G post-signing day power rankings (Minn #11)

Donate To GopherHole
BleedGopher

BleedGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
62,474
Reaction score
19,371
Points
113
"11. Minnesota: The Gophers inked a class that drew good reviews from ESPN's analysts. Jerry Kill and his staff retained several top in-state prospects, including offensive lineman Isaac Hayes, wide receiver Andre McDonald and quarterback Philip Nelson. McDonald and fellow wideout Jamel Harbison could be immediate contributors for an offense that needs more options. But defense must be the top offseason focal point for Minnesota, which added several juco defenders."

http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/45137/b1g-post-signing-day-power-rankings

Go Gophers!!
 

I know coaching plays into all this and there are those of you out there thrilled with the class we brought in. In general I like it as an overall class, it is just depressing though to read about the top talent going to other schools in the conference. Also think it is a little disappointing that most sites rank us below Illinois in spite of their coaching change, same could be said for Penn State although they have some built in advantages.

Here's hoping Kill's staff and systems are strong enough to win with lesser talent on paper then the teams the are going up against.
 

Whatever, This is more of a crap shoot then the August preseason football rankings.
 

MNVCGUY said:
Also think it is a little disappointing that most sites rank us below Illinois in spite of their coaching change, same could be said for Penn State although they have some built in advantages.
Click to expand...
Doesn't surprise or bother me that the coaching changes didn't shift things that much. No one knows if the new coaches will have a typically difficult first season or if they'll pull a Brady Hoke. Thus, they aren't going to penalize teams who had better years than MN for it.
 

ESPN power rankings are a joke. They won’t ever offer any semblance of value.

They have every incentive to tout the status quo as they will look stupid if they rank "a surprise team" highly. Probability dictates that said rankings are virtually similar to last year. First, ranking a surprise team would put their supposed credibility on a limb; A risk not worth taking because it will not sell more product. Secondly, if a team does upset the status quo they can highlight said surprise in overly dramatic fashion and sell more product later on.

Thus, maintaining the status quo is a strategic position that draws views in the offseason as it confirms our personal perceptions, which in turn strokes the ego (my program is superior thus I’m superior) or in the case of the weaker squads like us it illicit anger and a subsequent desire to see us move up said rankings. When they do turn out wrong they are once again rewarded with a feel good story and more hype.
All in all, it’s all really a positive feedback loop based on hype with no attachment to substantive analysis.

Simply put, its crap used to advertise more crap later on and never will convey any real value.
 


personally, i don't pay much attention to this kind of stuff or put a lot of emotional stock in them. reason being....take our 2008 recruiting class for example. it was ranked in the top 20 nationally by almost all of the recruiting websites but we didn't necessarily see those types of results on the field and in the record book. now sure some of the higher ranked recruits never made it onto the field or were around as long as expected due to grade problems or other things. but i think a lot of it is extremely subjective. a good coaching staff and a kid with a strong drive to become better can turn 2 and 3 star guys into all-conference and all-american types of players (i.e. eric decker, greg eslinger, willie van desteeg, etc, etc.)

i will put my faith in what a quality, long-time head coach like jerry kill and his staff think, before i put it into some computer screen jockeys/rubes from rivals, scout or espn.
 

atsgopher said:
ESPN power rankings are a joke. They won’t ever offer any semblance of value.

They have every incentive to tout the status quo as they will look stupid if they rank "a surprise team" highly. Probability dictates that said rankings are virtually similar to last year. First, ranking a surprise team would put their supposed credibility on a limb; A risk not worth taking because it will not sell more product. Secondly, if a team does upset the status quo they can highlight said surprise in overly dramatic fashion and sell more product later on.

Thus, maintaining the status quo is a strategic position that draws views in the offseason as it confirms our personal perceptions, which in turn strokes the ego (my program is superior thus I’m superior) or in the case of the weaker squads like us it illicit anger and a subsequent desire to see us move up said rankings. When they do turn out wrong they are once again rewarded with a feel good story and more hype.
All in all, it’s all really a positive feedback loop based on hype with no attachment to substantive analysis.

Simply put, its crap used to advertise more crap later on and never will convey any real value.
Click to expand...
So, I don't think you get how a Power Rankings poll works. There is no predictive value implied. The idea is to say "where do we think the teams rank at any given snapshot in time" only. And I'm not sure what the Gophers did during the signing period that should change the ranking. I like this recruiting class. But it isn't highly ranked and the kids in it haven't played football yet. So what about it should suddenly change a subjective ranking?
 

atsgopher said:
ESPN power rankings are a joke. They won’t ever offer any semblance of value.

They have every incentive to tout the status quo as they will look stupid if they rank "a surprise team" highly. Probability dictates that said rankings are virtually similar to last year. First, ranking a surprise team would put their supposed credibility on a limb; A risk not worth taking because it will not sell more product. Secondly, if a team does upset the status quo they can highlight said surprise in overly dramatic fashion and sell more product later on.

Thus, maintaining the status quo is a strategic position that draws views in the offseason as it confirms our personal perceptions, which in turn strokes the ego (my program is superior thus I’m superior) or in the case of the weaker squads like us it illicit anger and a subsequent desire to see us move up said rankings. When they do turn out wrong they are once again rewarded with a feel good story and more hype.
All in all, it’s all really a positive feedback loop based on hype with no attachment to substantive analysis.

Simply put, its crap used to advertise more crap later on and never will convey any real value.
Click to expand...

While I agree they have to be taken with a grain of salt I disagree that they offer no value. I also disagree that they have no incentive to pick a surprise team if they think there might be one. No one goes back to see how predictions made at this time of year turn out but if they come out and say the Gophers are primed to move up in the conference and it does happen they can promote the heck out of their prediction back in February coming true. What this says to me is that from the national perspective we are still viewed as an afterthought in the conference. Internally we may like what we see from Kill but the outsiders looking in don't see a lot to be impressed by yet.
 

The only recruiting class power rankings I care about are four or five years down the road after these young men graduate and play out their eligibility. That my friends is the only valuable time to evaluate a class. I'd be happy to read up on something like that and argue back and forth over that type of thing. However, right now though, these things don't mean a d@mn thing!
 



Ski-U-Mah24 said:
The only recruiting class power rankings I care about are four or five years down the road after these young men graduate and play out their eligibility. That my friends is the only valuable time to evaluate a class. I'd be happy to read up on something like that and argue back and forth over that type of thing. However, right now though, these things don't mean a d@mn thing!
Click to expand...
These weren't power rankings of the classes themselves. It was the regular power rankings, only redone after the classes had signed.
 

GoAUpher said:
These weren't power rankings of the classes themselves. It was the regular power rankings, only redone after the classes had signed.
Click to expand...

well, if that is the case, then their conference power rankings are even more clueless. no way do i put illinois, iowa or northwestern ahead of us. maybe not even penn state either.
 

I know Rittenberg won't take any stabs in the dark at this point, but I have a feeling we will finish better than 11th in the Big Ten.
 

We are going to be ranked at the bottom of all rankings until we start winning! I would be very surprised to see us ranked higher than last in all fall preseason rankings.
 



supadupafly said:
well, if that is the case, then their conference power rankings are even more clueless. no way do i put illinois, iowa or northwestern ahead of us. maybe not even penn state either.
Click to expand...
And what OBJECTIVE criteria would you use to justify that? I mean, when you get to the tail end of these things objective gets harder to do but the fact is that even with all the "feel good" stuff we as Gopher fans can latch on to, there is not yet anything solid to justify ranking them higher than they are. Which pretty much precludes the ESPN guys being "clueless".
 


GoAUpher said:
So, I don't think you get how a Power Rankings poll works. There is no predictive value implied. The idea is to say "where do we think the teams rank at any given snapshot in time" only. And I'm not sure what the Gophers did during the signing period that should change the ranking. I like this recruiting class. But it isn't highly ranked and the kids in it haven't played football yet. So what about it should suddenly change a subjective ranking?
Click to expand...

No, I get it... its predictive or snapshot or whatever other purpose is irrelevant. People naturally like lists; it's comforting to believe there is order in chaos. However, power rankings hold no value. I don't think people should continue to waste time clicking on these polls, it only perpetuates their existence.
 

atsgopher said:
No, I get it... its predictive or snapshot or whatever other purpose is irrelevant. People naturally like lists; it's comforting to believe there is order in chaos. However, power rankings hold no value. I don't think people should continue to waste time clicking on these polls, it only perpetuates their existence.
Click to expand...
They're going to exist anyway. ESPN pays these guys for content. It's the dead season for CFB. A power poll is easy content.
 

atsgopher said:
No, I get it... its predictive or snapshot or whatever other purpose is irrelevant. People naturally like lists; it's comforting to believe there is order in chaos. However, power rankings hold no value. I don't think people should continue to waste time clicking on these polls, it only perpetuates their existence.
Click to expand...


And yet, here you are commenting on it. And on a different web site. It's the very reason for their existence.
 

GoAUpher said:
They're going to exist anyway. ESPN pays these guys for content. It's the dead season for CFB. A power poll is easy content.
Click to expand...

True. Nonetheless, I want to call to question the validity of suspect content in order to highlight its absurd position in the sporting world. Call it a crusade or whatever, but I just think sports analysis has gone ridiculous to the detriment of underlying activity.
ESPN has been great for years and still is for about 2/3 of what they produce. Yet they also have a tendency to drum up drama where none exists. They both support and further a need for constant gratification.

Hype cheapens sport… over hype turns it into the WWF.

First the NBA changed their culture to a two tier rule system (fouls on stars vs everybody else) because of Hype. Next, it was the ‘Pass interference creep’ in the NFL. It’s gotten so bad that it becomes illegal to tackle a player with the ball, yet he can still advance (See ‘defenseless receiver’). Then Hockey with smaller goals and baseball with replay; the machine needs to end now.

If it permeates to college athletics we won’t have anything left to watch. At least that’s any good.

If we all refrain from encouraging that behavior then they’ll end up quitting.
 

When did hockey start using smaller goals?
 


atsgopher said:
True. Nonetheless, I want to call to question the validity of suspect content in order to highlight its absurd position in the sporting world. Call it a crusade or whatever, but I just think sports analysis has gone ridiculous to the detriment of underlying activity.
ESPN has been great for years and still is for about 2/3 of what they produce. Yet they also have a tendency to drum up drama where none exists. They both support and further a need for constant gratification.

Hype cheapens sport… over hype turns it into the WWF.

First the NBA changed their culture to a two tier rule system (fouls on stars vs everybody else) because of Hype. Next, it was the ‘Pass interference creep’ in the NFL. It’s gotten so bad that it becomes illegal to tackle a player with the ball, yet he can still advance (See ‘defenseless receiver’). Then Hockey with smaller goals and baseball with replay; the machine needs to end now.

If it permeates to college athletics we won’t have anything left to watch. At least that’s any good.

If we all refrain from encouraging that behavior then they’ll end up quitting.
Click to expand...
That's the thing though, how is this suspect content? It seems like your main problem with the poll is that the criteria for the rankings aren't the ones you would pick (whatever those are, I'm still unclear). I don't see how it's suspect just because it isn't run the way you want it to be run.

As for you railing about ESPN and hype, what about this poll suggests hype? If anything, it's a pretty conventional view of the rankings.
 

GoAUpher said:
That's the thing though, how is this suspect content? It seems like your main problem with the poll is that the criteria for the rankings aren't the ones you would pick (whatever those are, I'm still unclear). I don't see how it's suspect just because it isn't run the way you want it to be run.

As for you railing about ESPN and hype, what about this poll suggests hype? If anything, it's a pretty conventional view of the rankings.
Click to expand...

It is suspect content because it offers no meaning, no value, nothing.

I don’t have a problem with the criteria; I have a problem with its existence.

It’s pointless filler where nothing is appropriate.
 

atsgopher said:
It is suspect content because it offers no meaning, no value, nothing.

I don’t have a problem with the criteria; I have a problem with its existence.

It’s pointless filler where nothing is appropriate.
Click to expand...
Wouldn't it then also be harmless and thus not worth getting worked up about? If it's so worthless, then just ignore it.
 

"The only recruiting class power rankings I care about are four or five years down the road after these young men graduate and play out their eligibility." I think the niche Minnesota could fill is the good student, good citizen athlete who would stay with the program for four or five years and earn a degree. They may not be the top recruits, but top recruits tend to leave their programs before using up their eligibility. If we could sign kids who will stay and develop into a team in their upperclassmen years, we would likely improve our performance. It seems like Kill is moving in this direction. This is the UMD model and it has worked well for them in their division.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom