I want this for Minnesota football

Donate To GopherHole
GopherMenace said:
In my opinion, until Fleck has a season or two where his teams don’t come out miserably flat against a lesser opponent or get embarrassingly blown out by a team of similar talent. I think you’ll be extremely hard pressed to find a major booster who would be willing to take the team seriously enough to invest heavy capital. Frankly I don’t blame those boosters either. If his current teams falter against the Cals and Purdues of the world, then why would I trust that, even with more talent, they wouldn’t falter against the Iowas and Illinoises of the world and cost themselves at a shot at the playoffs? I am a Fleck fan, but I think this is the biggest thing he needs to work on to get over the hump.

I’m also sure Cignatti will have his share of ugly losses, but at the CURRENT moment he has zero. It’s pretty easy to sell the idea of competing for a National Title to boosters when the head coach has never lost to a team of similar or lesser talent during his tenure at the school.
Click to expand...
I guess it's kind of a chicken or the egg type situation... Couldn't the money come first to get better players, and then maybe we wouldn't lose the "games we should win?"

Texas Tech comes to mind, there was just a post made today about the money pumped into that program, and now they're a top 10 team. I would say our recent history is better than theirs.

www.sports-reference.com

Texas Tech Red Raiders College Football History, Stats, Records | College Football at Sports-Reference.com

Check out the Texas Tech Red Raiders College Football History, Stats, Records, Polls, Bowls and More College Football Stats at Sports-Reference.com
www.sports-reference.com www.sports-reference.com
 

GopherMenace said:
2021 Bowling Green, 2021 Illinois, 2022 Purdue, 2023 Northwestern, 2024 North Carolina, 2024 Rutgers, 2025 Cal, and I’d even argue this years blow out was an inexplicable bad loss due to how badly they got beat. Outside of that 2023 Northwestern game, because that season was a down year regardless, you win those games (which based off of talent I believe we should’ve won pretty easily) and the perception of the program is dramatically different.
Click to expand...
Those aren’t all inexplicable. How TF can people not explain losing to Cal when we barely beat Purdue and Mich St? The talent level difference is not what you think it is. Not every loss where we are a slight favorite or even a slight dog is inexplicable.
 

Pretty happy with PJ bringing the Gophers up a level. Lest we not forget, Hoosiers have that Rain on the Scarecrow John Mellencamp money.
 

Of all the seasons to knock a coach who has raised this program on and off the field, this rebuilding year Fleck has managed to win games when his team’s experience and maybe talent has seemed outclassed.
 

GopherMenace said:
In my opinion, until Fleck has a season or two where his teams don’t come out miserably flat against a lesser opponent or get embarrassingly blown out by a team of similar talent. I think you’ll be extremely hard pressed to find a major booster who would be willing to take the team seriously enough to invest heavy capital. Frankly I don’t blame those boosters either. If his current teams falter against the Cals and Purdues of the world, then why would I trust that, even with more talent, they wouldn’t falter against the Iowas and Illinoises of the world and cost themselves at a shot at the playoffs? I am a Fleck fan, but I think this is the biggest thing he needs to work on to get over the hump.

I’m also sure Cignatti will have his share of ugly losses, but at the CURRENT moment he has zero. It’s pretty easy to sell the idea of competing for a National Title to boosters when the head coach has never lost to a team of similar or lesser talent during his tenure at the school.
Click to expand...

Agree. Even when the odds are long to make a playoff push.....you don't want the mirage to be shattered in the first few weeks if you want to create any sort of hype.
 



LeftofThaDial said:
I don’t think everyone thought it was a rebuilding year.
Click to expand...

Here is why I would argue that it is:
  • Freshman Qb
  • Almost all new o line (Ersery starting in NFL and Daniel’s at OSU)
  • Losing the top two wideouts
  • Losing two top corners
  • Losing three other defensive starters now on active rosters
And not rebuild related but Taylor mostly out contributes to an overarching narrative.
 


btowngopher said:
Those aren’t all inexplicable. How TF can people not explain losing to Cal when we barely beat Purdue and Mich St? The talent level difference is not what you think it is. Not every loss where we are a slight favorite or even a slight dog is inexplicable.
Click to expand...
For the the inexplicable ones have been Bowling Green, the blown lead collapse against NW, and the utter face plant against Iowa this year.

I know every team lays an egg now and again, but I dont recall Fleck pulling off an upset where we were 20+ point dogs (bowling green), having a comeback from a fourth quarter deficit anywhere near what NW faced against us, or utterly dominating a trophy game the way Iowa did to us this year. "Crap happens" is a much easier way to shrug off those kind of catastrophes when we are also able tk be the ones making that type of crap happen to someone else.

Ill commit right now, if Fleck wins a game where we are underdogs by as many points as bowling Green was in our lossto them, I will never mention the bowling green loss again on this board (except in the context of celebrating our upset victory and acknowledging that it was a bigger upset than when BG beat us).
 



WorkingMyTailOff said:
Of all the seasons to knock a coach who has raised this program on and off the field, this rebuilding year Fleck has managed to win games when his team’s experience and maybe talent has seemed outclassed.
Click to expand...
Or, maybe our talent is good and we’ve coached where we have needed a couple of blind squirrel type wins to stay out of the conference basement.
 

WorkingMyTailOff said:
Here is why I would argue that it is:
  • Freshman Qb
  • Almost all new o line (Ersery starting in NFL and Daniel’s at OSU)
  • Losing the top two wideouts
  • Losing two top corners
  • Losing three other defensive starters now on active rosters
And not rebuild related but Taylor mostly out contributes to an overarching narrative.
Click to expand...
These were all known things, so is it your contention that Fleck isn't developing his recruits to be ready to step in when the opportunity is there?
 

PMWinSTP said:
These were all known things, so is it your contention that Fleck isn't developing his recruits to be ready to step in when the opportunity is there?
Click to expand...
My argument is that due to multiple factors (recruiting disadvantage, small NIL, underpaying assistants) means Gophers will have down years. Being bowl eligible in down years is a marked improvement.
 

BroncoRedux said:
A follow-up to my last post, the men who went on Omaha Beach were for the most part, 17, 18, and 19 years old. Let's accept better from our young men.
Click to expand...
I think most of them trained for up to 2 years so I think most close to 20.
 






WorkingMyTailOff said:
Here is why I would argue that it is:
  • Freshman Qb
  • Almost all new o line (Ersery starting in NFL and Daniel’s at OSU)
  • Losing the top two wideouts
  • Losing two top corners
  • Losing three other defensive starters now on active rosters
And not rebuild related but Taylor mostly out contributes to an overarching narrative.
Click to expand...
Not sure PJ agrees with you. At least by the amount of hyperbole he's espoused about the team, at least until we started playing games.

I don't disagree that this was a transition year, but noone was talking rebuild.....
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom