Fleck: This is still a developmental program. Year nine has nothing to do with it. Every year is its own entity. We lost nine NFL players last year…

Donate To GopherHole

GopherGrit said:
They took tons of OL guys and missed on a bunch. Both high school players and certainly this year transfers.

Losing Daniels to Ohio State doesn't help either.
Click to expand...
In retrospect, they should have opened up the bank for Daniels. Somewhere in the neighborhood of:

Dr. Evil One Million Dollars.jpg
 
Last edited:

A_Slab_of_Bacon said:
Based on talent level ... I'd argue that last years team actually underachieved and this years has to some extent overachieved.
Click to expand...

I would agree with that to an extent. Last year's team had the #9 scoring defense in the country (16.9 points allowed per game). It didn't have a high scoring offense but it was slightly better than this year's offense.

However, this year's team had a much more favorable conference schedule. Before the Wisconsin game, both teams had a 4-4 conference record. The conference record of defeated opponents (excluding Wisconsin) of last year's team was 14-22 (38.9%). Two of those wins were on the road. The conference record so far of defeated opponents this year is 6-26 (18.8%) and all of those have been at home. Finally, this year's team has 5 home conference games while last year's team had only four.
 

Gopher Mac said:
He needs to stop this. Year 9 matters. The fact that they missed on almost all of their portal addictions matter. The fact that they don't have 5 division 1 offensive lineman on the team in year 9 matter.
Click to expand...

Yes, those things matter but recruiting failures can happen just as easily in year 9 as they can in years 5, 6, 7, or 8.

The Year 9 mantra is flat out stupid. Fleck is right about that.
 



There is no such thing as a developmental program anymore. The Fleck brand is tired and it shows more and more every game. The whole approach needs to get with the times, we are not poised to do that.
 

On one hand, I get the frustration here, I think last year's team left some meat on the bone for sure. Not too far from a 9-win season, even 10-win if all fell right. Rutgers loss was a top five bad loss in PJ era and the UNC loss was bad not because the kicker missed it, but because the coaches didn't believe in Brosmer yet. They should have. That game played a month later is a two TD win for MN.

That said, I also agree with PJ's point. People shouting about year nine is dumb. At programs like Minnesota, it isn't linear. Its not an easy job. There will be ebbs and flows. And now with the portal, each year is a new one in a new way. In some ways that could make is easier to never have a down year, in others it can make it harder to hit a top peak due to player movement.

I think there are legit reasons you could be mad about things currently. But, I really think screaming Year Nine is a lazy argument in my opinion. I love Chip Scoggins, great writer. Every time he's on the radio or a podcast he always uses the Year Nine thing as a negative to PJ. Drives me nuts. He is one of the few in this market who gets college football. He should know better. It isn't linear.

"Year Nine" examples (trying to find comparable programs):

Kirk Ferentz (Year Nine at Iowa): 6-6 (Year Seven was 10-2)
Hayden Fry (Year Nine at Iowa): 10-3 (Year 10 was 6-4-3, Year 11 was 5-7)
Barry Alvarez (Year Nine at Wis): 11-1 (Year 12 was 5-7)
Glen Mason (Year Nine at MN): 7-6 (Year Ten was 6-6 and he was fired)
Gary Pinkel (Year Nine at Mizzou): 8-5 (Year 12 was 5-7, Year 13 was 12-2)
Bill Snyder (Year Nine at K-State): 11-1 (Year 13 6-6, Year 16 4-7)
Mark Dantonio (Year Nine at MSU): 12-2 (Year 10 was 3-9)

There just isn't any such thing as a linear line in college football, particularly at spots like Minnesota. It will ebb and flow. I might add, it is amazing when looking these up how much the ebbs and flows are directly related to quarterback play. Getting great QB play is probably the single biggest factor in winning big at places like Minnesota. That's why if they keep Lindsey it is worth seeing this thing through.

Again, plenty to complain about if you want. But, saying Year Nine as a reason to think it should be better is just dumb.
 

GopherGrit said:
Fleck = 1-2 losses per year that could have easily been wins. Sometimes more, in bad years.

2024, we should have beaten UNC and Rutgers. That turns 7-5 into 9-3.
Click to expand...

This is true.

But, it is also true, they were a QB sneak replay review away from losing to USC and the main reason they won was because PJ chose to go for the sneak. USC had to go for a TD on the final drive and couldn't do it. Gophers were trailing UCLA late and MN had some brilliant play-calling on the game-winning drive, including the key third down conversion to Brockington and the TD to DT.

Lose those two and it turns into 5-7.

So, it goes both ways.
 

1983 said:
There is no such thing as a developmental program anymore. The Fleck brand is tired and it shows more and more every game. The whole approach needs to get with the times, we are not poised to do that.
Click to expand...
What other choice is there for Minnesota?
 



GopherGuy82 said:
This just screams WTF happened last year with all that talent? You can't skirt past that to make this year seem better. Definitely a bad look making comments like that.
Click to expand...
You have to give it to PJ, he’s got all the answers.
 


GopherGrit said:
Fleck = 1-2 losses per year that could have easily been wins. Sometimes more, in bad years.

2024, we should have beaten UNC and Rutgers. That turns 7-5 into 9-3.

This year, if we manage to beat Wisconsin, it's basically the same thing. Cal and Northwestern games were there to be won.


Can probably say the same thing for 2021-23 years in the easy Big Ten West.


We have had plenty of talent to win 9 games a year against these schedules. Schemes are fine ... nothing special about them.

It really comes down to poor playcalling and in-game decision making.

(Note: I heavily disagree with the choice to run 3 man fronts/rushes on defense .. but there's nothing "wrong" with that scheme, it's plenty sound. It's just a s__tty playcall most of the time)
Click to expand...
This assessment is spot on!
 




Year 9 used to matter. Now, the rules change every year. The players used to stay at one school.
We need better assistant coaches and fhat evidently requires you pay them more money, Minnesota is unwilling to do that.

Missouri is 3 and 4 in the SEC...they just signed their coach up for a $10.75 million dollar per year contract to ensure they keep him.
 
Last edited:



60's Guy said:
Year 9 used to matter. Now, the rules change every year. The players used to stay at one school.
We need better assistant coaches and fhat evidently requires you pay them more money, Minnesota is unwilling to do that.

Missouri is 3 and 4 in the SEC...they just signed their coach up for a $10.75 million dollar per year contract to ensure they keep him.
Click to expand...
Yeah....at this point basically every coach is in year 2-3 of this new college landscape that is nothing like what it was before and changes constantly.
 

Nine years...can the rest of you GHers ask your therapist how to move on from Fleck? I have moved on and I didn't pay a therapist.
 

GopherGuy82 said:
This just screams WTF happened last year with all that talent? You can't skirt past that to make this year seem better. Definitely a bad look making comments like that.
Click to expand...
That’s my feeling. I have no issues with this season as a rebuild if we lost that much talent to graduation and NFL, last year was the real disappointment.
 

btowngopher said:
We were better last year than this year. Unfortunately lost a few winnable ones that would’ve made last year look even better.
Click to expand...
It’s more the point of he is using last year like we were in the running for the CFP. We were good, not great.

Fleck routinely has multiple games if he were to win we would have a much different view on his entire tenure.

Yes, we lost talent…
 

GopherGrit said:
Fleck = 1-2 losses per year that could have easily been wins. Sometimes more, in bad years.

2024, we should have beaten UNC and Rutgers. That turns 7-5 into 9-3.

This year, if we manage to beat Wisconsin, it's basically the same thing. Cal and Northwestern games were there to be won.


Can probably say the same thing for 2021-23 years in the easy Big Ten West.


We have had plenty of talent to win 9 games a year against these schedules. Schemes are fine ... nothing special about them.

It really comes down to poor playcalling and in-game decision making.

(Note: I heavily disagree with the choice to run 3 man fronts/rushes on defense .. but there's nothing "wrong" with that scheme, it's plenty sound. It's just a s__tty playcall most of the time)
Click to expand...
When year after year the "should have" wins pile up, maybe it means we really shouldn't have.
 

tjgopher said:
On one hand, I get the frustration here, I think last year's team left some meat on the bone for sure. Not too far from a 9-win season, even 10-win if all fell right. Rutgers loss was a top five bad loss in PJ era and the UNC loss was bad not because the kicker missed it, but because the coaches didn't believe in Brosmer yet. They should have. That game played a month later is a two TD win for MN.

That said, I also agree with PJ's point. People shouting about year nine is dumb. At programs like Minnesota, it isn't linear. Its not an easy job. There will be ebbs and flows. And now with the portal, each year is a new one in a new way. In some ways that could make is easier to never have a down year, in others it can make it harder to hit a top peak due to player movement.

I think there are legit reasons you could be mad about things currently. But, I really think screaming Year Nine is a lazy argument in my opinion. I love Chip Scoggins, great writer. Every time he's on the radio or a podcast he always uses the Year Nine thing as a negative to PJ. Drives me nuts. He is one of the few in this market who gets college football. He should know better. It isn't linear.

"Year Nine" examples (trying to find comparable programs):

Kirk Ferentz (Year Nine at Iowa): 6-6 (Year Seven was 10-2)
Hayden Fry (Year Nine at Iowa): 10-3 (Year 10 was 6-4-3, Year 11 was 5-7)
Barry Alvarez (Year Nine at Wis): 11-1 (Year 12 was 5-7)
Glen Mason (Year Nine at MN): 7-6 (Year Ten was 6-6 and he was fired)
Gary Pinkel (Year Nine at Mizzou): 8-5 (Year 12 was 5-7, Year 13 was 12-2)
Bill Snyder (Year Nine at K-State): 11-1 (Year 13 6-6, Year 16 4-7)
Mark Dantonio (Year Nine at MSU): 12-2 (Year 10 was 3-9)

There just isn't any such thing as a linear line in college football, particularly at spots like Minnesota. It will ebb and flow. I might add, it is amazing when looking these up how much the ebbs and flows are directly related to quarterback play. Getting great QB play is probably the single biggest factor in winning big at places like Minnesota. That's why if they keep Lindsey it is worth seeing this thing through.

Again, plenty to complain about if you want. But, saying Year Nine as a reason to think it should be better is just dumb.
Click to expand...
Seems like a gradual but consistent ebb since the flow of 2019.
 

MaxyJR1 said:
That’s my feeling. I have no issues with this season as a rebuild if we lost that much talent to graduation and NFL, last year was the real disappointment.
Click to expand...
The nonsense in the statements I think you’re on something since you’re clearly not onto something. This season has been a train wreck to watch.
 



Sorry. Maybe I’m lost in the bullshit. Are we supposed to change our best or not?
 

This staff can no longer teach a solid zone defence. What has changed??
We have had solid defences in the past without a boat load of elte players.
Heck, we held Mike Leach and his 40 point average air raid offence to 12 points in the Holiday Bowl.
We had four Defensive backs out in that game. Zone defence was also a strenth with Rossi and Corey Hetherman. Now its a train wreck.
 
Last edited:

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom