Is it just me or is the star level of our recruiting

Donate To GopherHole
Word said:
Not sure if they op was just trolling. Assuming not, the recruits are definitely an upgrade (on paper) albeit not by a huge margin. High 3 Stars vs low 3 Stars basically.

Sent from my Commodore 64.
Click to expand...

Can't see how u think they're hi 3*, at least by 247 composite ranking. If one were to assign ratings of .8000-.8299 as low 3*, and .8700-.8999 as high 3* we have 1 barely high 3* (Rush .8700) and 4 low 3* with the rest being mid.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 


Pompous Elitist said:
Your post also illustrates Kill/Claeyes did more with less at NIU (and MN) relative to croot rankings. <b>Fleck did more with more talent. </b>If Fleck can recruit at a higher level and coach them up then we should be cooking. If he can't elevate middle of the Big Ten pack recruits like Wisconsin and Iowa have then we'll be sitting in pretty much the same solid but unspectacular situation, albeit with a more telegenic coach.
Click to expand...

The bolded is my concern. In the MAC he dominated on the field - with the most talent. In the B1G he won't ever have the most talent - so the question is "can he win at a high level"? Only time will tell, but this is a whole different game than the success he had a WMU where the best wins he had are the ones that "don't count" here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Oregon Gopher said:
Can't see how u think they're hi 3*, at least by 247 composite ranking. If one were to assign ratings of .8000-.8299 as low 3*, and .8700-.8999 as high 3* we have 1 barely high 3* (Rush .8700) and 4 low 3* with the rest being mid.


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

Stop blinding me with science. Rush has one dot then. Why not .8699 as is the m.o.
 




Spoofin said:
The bolded is my concern. In the MAC he dominated on the field - with the most talent. In the B1G he won't ever have the most talent - so the question is "can he win at a high level"? Only time will tell, but this is a whole different game than the success he had a WMU where the best wins he had are the ones that "don't count" here.


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

This has been the basis for my entire argument for not expecting too much in Year 1 - which got me labeled as a sandbagging Fleckster.

As for this year's recruiting VS a typical Claeys/Kill year, the numbers do show that this class is shaping up to have more depth of talent (on paper) than previous years. Honestly, if all Fleck is able to do is better evaluate/develop QBs and WRs while everything else stays at the same level we will be much improved - we shall see. Long way to go, though, folks. Who knows...we may already have a couple 4 stars committed. Once the high school season starts, rankings may change.
 





This staff is certainly more aggressive in getting offers out. Fleck will sign 25 -27 kids depending on if the 2 he has available for 2017 are filled with late qualifiers. I think the class will end up in the 40 range. Next year with the athletic village completed and a successful season ( 8 plus wins) I look for a top 25 class.
 

MrC said:
And now, got the Gophers, ranking since 2008

Year Rank in Big Ten
2008 6
2009 7
2010 8
2011 12
2012 12
2013 14
2014 11
2015 13
2016 8
2017 12
2018 5 (long way to go!)

Jerry was our coach from 2011 to 2015. His recruiting performance was pretty lackluster. But in my opinion, he did coach them to a higher level.

I remain optimistic that Fleck will outperform Jerry in recruiting rankings, and on the field.

Here is the 247 link: http://minnesota.247sports.com/Season/2018-Football/Commits

Please point out any mistakes?
Click to expand...

Team rankings are a really tough way to judge this sort of thing (even for the people that follow it closely). The number of recruits simply plays too big of a factor.
 

Johnnyboy18 said:
Says the King of strawmanning.
Click to expand...

LOL.

God, I hope this is a troll account.

He directly responded to someone else's straw man, yet this is your response?

Again, if this is a bit, it's brilliant. If not, it is. . . well. . . something else.
 

Spoofin said:
The bolded is my concern. In the MAC he dominated on the field - with the most talent. In the B1G he won't ever have the most talent - so the question is "can he win at a high level"? Only time will tell, but this is a whole different game than the success he had a WMU where the best wins he had are the ones that "don't count" here.


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

Yeah, this is the unknown variable with PJ. Can he win consistently when he doesn't have the best talent?

He did an amazing job of bringing in talent to Western Michigan. I think he'll recruit higher caliber athletes (on the whole) to the U. However, I still don't think we will regularly finish in the top 5 in the Big 10 in recruiting. I could be wrong on that, I hope I am. So, is he going to be able to finish in the top 6 of the Big 10 every year despite NOT recruiting at that level? Please note, I'm not arguing he can't or won't, I'm saying it's an unknown. It's largely an unknown because of his good work (great recruiter), so this isn't a rip on him.

Maybe my question is wrong and he will be able to bring in those great classes every year.

BTW - I hate the kid gloves we have to use around here now to avoid Fleckophiles going crazy.
 



Bob_Loblaw said:
LOL.

God, I hope this is a troll account.

He directly responded to someone else's straw man, yet this is your response?

Again, if this is a bit, it's brilliant. If not, it is. . . well. . . something else.
Click to expand...

?

What are you even talking about? He constantly makes straw man arguments so I responded with that. So funny, I know.
 

Johnnyboy18 said:
?

What are you even talking about? He constantly makes straw man arguments so I responded with that. So funny, I know.
Click to expand...

It's hilarious.

The funny part is that you chose a time to call someone out on making straw man arguments when he was in the process of destroying someone else's straw man argument. It's ironic and it's funny.

You're a funny guy, I just hope you're in on the joke.
 

Bob_Loblaw said:
It's hilarious.

The funny part is that you chose a time to call someone out on making straw man arguments when he was in the process of destroying someone else's straw man argument. It's ironic and it's funny.

You're a funny guy, I just hope you're in on the joke.
Click to expand...

Yeah some would even call that hypocritical. Super duper funny.
 

Johnnyboy18 said:
Yeah some would even call that hypocritical. Super duper funny.
Click to expand...

C'mon!

You're purposely deflecting away from a substantive conversation to complain about someone destroying a straw man by calling out someone else for making a straw man in the past. It is super duper funny. You obviously have ZERO issue with straw man arguments that fit your creepy Fleck worshiping narrative. So, we've established you have zero logical integrity.

Even if your premise is correct that Dpo is "King of strawmanning" (sic), that bothers you so much that you defend other people who make straw man arguments? "Yep some would call it hypocritical" (sic), you're right. If it was real, we'd also call it ironic and pathetic.
 

Bob_Loblaw said:
C'mon!

You're purposely deflecting away from a substantive conversation to complain about someone destroying a straw man by calling out someone else for making a straw man in the past. It is super duper funny. You obviously have ZERO issue with straw man arguments that fit your creepy Fleck worshiping narrative. So, we've established you have zero logical integrity.

Even if your premise is correct that Dpo is "King of strawmanning" (sic), that bothers you so much that you defend other people who make straw man arguments? "Yep some would call it hypocritical" (sic), you're right. If it was real, we'd also call it ironic and pathetic.
Click to expand...

Where have I worshipped Fleck? Where have I strawmanned for Fleck. I think he will be a better coach than the previous coach that's it. Not once have I worshipped him.
 



Johnnyboy18 said:
Where have I NOT worshipped Fleck? Where have I NOT strawmanned for Fleck. I think he will be a better coach than the previous coach that's it. I have worshipped him at every possible moment.
Click to expand...

FIFY.

You are one of the only ones on here who the moment someone says anything that could be considered a slight negative towards PJ has to respond to defend PJ. Not only that, but you also need to make comments to disparage the previous coaches to show how great PJ is.
 

joshvanklomp said:
That's why I didn't make any comparisons to other programs. Just comparing 2016 to 2018, which is what the OP did.
Click to expand...

2016 class was 21 recruits, with seven 2* (including AW Jr). Add two mid 3* and one low 4* to this year's class to get to 21. In comparison overall, they would be close to identical.
 

Fleck's recruiting rankings at WMU were somewhat misleading.

34 of his recruits lasted only one year or didn't even make it to the first game of their freshman year.
 

Broncos181973 said:
Fleck's recruiting rankings at WMU were somewhat misleading.

34 of his recruits lasted only one year or didn't even make it to the first game of their freshman year.
Click to expand...

34 ... total through all his WMU years?

Is that more than most places?
 

A_Slab_of_Bacon said:
34 ... total through all his WMU years?

Is that more than most places?
Click to expand...

I'm not arguing with him, I'm sure he'd know more than I would. However, if that's the truth, that's a pretty big problem. Attrition kills teams working their way up. It was one of major causes of Brew's failures.

It would also put those "team rankings" into perspective a bit. If you're bringing in 25-30 kids every year, that helps.
 

Bob_Loblaw said:
I'm not arguing with him, I'm sure he'd know more than I would. However, if that's the truth, that's a pretty big problem. Attrition kills teams working their way up. It was one of major causes of Brew's failures.

It would also put those "team rankings" into perspective a bit. If you're bringing in 25-30 kids every year, that helps.
Click to expand...

Yeah I don't quite know what that stat is or means.

It also depends on the school and etc. If WMU was super tolerant of bringing in borderline kids who may or may not make it, that's cool, there's a place for that in the world of CFB too.

Generally I find it hard to compare / contrast MAC crooting with B1G and get anything out of it as far as what I think are reasonable conclusions and expectations.
 

Bob_Loblaw said:
It would also put those "team rankings" into perspective a bit. If you're bringing in 25-30 kids every year, that helps.
Click to expand...

It doesn't on Rivals. They only consider the top 20 recruits for team rankings, and most teams sign 20.

It's a little less clear on 247. It appears it's weighted so once the team is beyond somewhere between 20-22 recruits, it also matters very little to the overall ranking.
 

How dare you point that out. Our recruiting is seeing a much needed upgrade over the previous staff. Lol right. Maybe in the future but so far I am not seeing it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

I was hoping to get some useful information. Nothing but another bashing thread. Are people that bored with their lives?
 

#2Gopher said:
I was hoping to get some useful information. Nothing but another bashing thread. Are people that bored with their lives?
Click to expand...

Join Date
May 2010
Posts
1,711


And you thought you'd get useful information here?
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom