Just think if Brewster could have had these types of recruits from beginning

Donate To GopherHole
G

gopherdudepart2

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
5,145
Reaction score
1,959
Points
113
The current types of athletes he and his staff have recruited RFR and true Freshman plus this offensive and defensive philosophies from the beginning. There would be more juniors and seniors like the current group of young players.
Instead of dinking around with the spread and Mike Dunbar, if we could have had the current type of coordinators on offense and defense from the beginning, IF ONLY.
How much further would they be along in the program? How about those types of players they had in place from the beignning running a pro-style offense that emphasized the run, protecting the defense, more of what they knew. Likely more wins to start and more buy-in factor from fans, even recruits they missed out on. Can't have it that way, but none of these fire Brewster comments, the USD loss all of it goes away, I think had they got started on the right foot. To bad you can't turn back the clock.
 

Just think IF Brewster was actually a good coach & decided to run more then 3 different plays today...just think...
 

if you cannot develop the talent you have, it really doesn't matter- brew will have lots of time to ponder your question in a few shorts weeks
 

I wish he would have. Then we could have learned right away in 2007 that no, in fact, he cannot coach.
 

thailleagle said:
Just think IF Brewster was actually a good coach & decided to run more then 3 different plays today...just think...
Click to expand...

Just...think...if...you...realized...that...Brewster...doesn't...call...the...plays...

Also...just..think...if...you...realized...that...when...comparing...the...amounts...of...something...the...word...is...spelled..."than"...
 



Spread was a bad choice to begin with and Dunbar is about as pure a spread advocate out there. I had a bad feeling from the beginning on the spread decision, but I'm Scandinavian, so I most of my thoughts are a cross of Ingmar Bergman and Soren Kierkegaard. In other words, I imagine the worst and am satisfied with the slightly better.
 

thailleagle said:
Just think IF Brewster was actually a good coach & decided to run more then 3 different plays today...just think...
Click to expand...

How many of your posts are directly after a Gopher Loss? You show up the minute the Gophers are losing to South Dakota after an 8 month hiatus from the board and haven't stopped spewing post after post of anti gopher football hate. Some people are just miserable human beings.
 

Gold Vision said:
How many of your posts are directly after a Gopher Loss? You show up the minute the Gophers are losing to South Dakota after an 8 month hiatus from the board and haven't stopped spewing post after post of anti gopher football hate. Some people are just miserable human beings.
Click to expand...

Stop stalking me thanks...

Funny you "think" you know my posting history yet I have no idea who you are...or care...
 



180 since USD

Brewster finally has a staff that is committed to a football philosophy that says take steps that can be first understood and executed. Then, add in more difficult skills and decentralize the decision making. The point is they want zero execution mistakes (think Six Sigma). Just because we ran up the middle on USC doesn't mean it is a bad thing, operationally speaking. I think if you want to win the Big Ten, and you want to develop the technique to do so, you have to work out the kinks in the early schedule. Once in the B10 you take what you learned and improved and game plan those. Horton is using classic experiments on the field during game situations to verify what is working and what doesn't. He needs enough reps to develop an understanding of what can be controlled. I think the USC game gave us an excellent understanding of what works and doesn't against very capable players across the board. If I am right, big if -- I know, then we will see a clear win against NI next week. I don't quite have the same confidence with Cosgrove, but with what I saw on the field, I do think there were game adjustments, but, a few breakdowns of assignments and bad breaks lost the game in the end. There is no accounting for a bad bounce on the foot of a player running away from the kick. Just the mathmatical probability of that is so high...
 

Based on the extremely difficult schedule ahead, without significant improvement the Gophers are looking at a 2-11 or 3-10 season as they will be decided underdogs in all but two of their remaining games. I'm not sure that is a great improvement over Brew's first season 1 win total. It is possible that the Gophers will win a couple games where they will be underdogs, but I don't think many of us thought things would be this bleak in year 4 of Brewster's tenure.
 

Oneoldgopher said:
Brewster finally has a staff that is committed to a football philosophy that says take steps that can be first understood and executed. Then, add in more difficult skills and decentralize the decision making. The point is they want zero execution mistakes (think Six Sigma). Just because we ran up the middle on USC doesn't mean it is a bad thing, operationally speaking. I think if you want to win the Big Ten, and you want to develop the technique to do so, you have to work out the kinks in the early schedule. Once in the B10 you take what you learned and improved and game plan those. Horton is using classic experiments on the field during game situations to verify what is working and what doesn't. He needs enough reps to develop an understanding of what can be controlled. I think the USC game gave us an excellent understanding of what works and doesn't against very capable players across the board. If I am right, big if -- I know, then we will see a clear win against NI next week. I don't quite have the same confidence with Cosgrove, but with what I saw on the field, I do think there were game adjustments, but, a few breakdowns of assignments and bad breaks lost the game in the end. There is no accounting for a bad bounce on the foot of a player running away from the kick. Just the mathmatical probability of that is so high...
Click to expand...

Good post.

I think though that the process is longer than that. We should see some gains but they will be smaller. A part of the process is to communicate to the kids what the coaches are trying to do and what they expect. There is a much slower learning process involved in the trenches where the players need to figure out how to be successful. The advantage we'll have is that we will continue to do these things over and over and eventually will be superior to those who have to solve us in one game while we bring in years of refined technique. Right now we have a little over a year with Davis, and three games with Horton. But it's the right approach and will eventually work.
 

Interesting theory. Of course, why didn't Brewster just come out and say:

"We're going to treat the month of September like its the NFL preseason. Bear with us as we run a couple of designed experiments to see whether Adam Weber can hit a receiver in stride and so we can determine the standard deviation of how long he locks in on his primary target. We also want to see if not having any experienced defenders in the secondary makes a statistically significant difference against a mobile QB. See you in October".

I'm being a smartazz, but you get my point. Training camp is where you figure all these things out (unless you're Brett Favre). I agree that Brewster has brought in better quality recruits as a whole than Mason, and the difference has started to show, particularly on defense. OTOH, he's had 4 years to recruit and develop gamechanging players at the skill positions (QB, RB, WR), and so far, other than #5, he's oh-fer-trey in that regard.

I'm afraid that the improvement in athleticism is too little, too late to save Brewster's job, barring a miraculous improvement once BT play starts (I'm not holding my breath). Using your analogy, the 4th NFL preseason game is usually where teams want everything to click with their starters, so the NIU game will be telling in that regard. The silver lining is that Brewster will be leaving behind a lot more talent across the board than he inherited from Mason. That might make this job more attractive to potential candidates.
 



How did the Gophers do in their pre-season games anyway. I totally agree, that's where you need to figure these things out. I must have spaced them out, I totally missed them.
 

thailleagle said:
Stop stalking me thanks...

Funny you "think" you know my posting history yet I have no idea who you are...or care...
Click to expand...

It hardly takes a stalker to understand your posting history. Good God, you're in every thread with the same message repeatedly over the last week-and-a-half. Do you not realize this???
 

Oneoldgopher said:
Brewster finally has a staff that is committed to a football philosophy that says take steps that can be first understood and executed. Then, add in more difficult skills and decentralize the decision making. The point is they want zero execution mistakes (think Six Sigma). Just because we ran up the middle on USC doesn't mean it is a bad thing, operationally speaking. I think if you want to win the Big Ten, and you want to develop the technique to do so, you have to work out the kinks in the early schedule. Once in the B10 you take what you learned and improved and game plan those. Horton is using classic experiments on the field during game situations to verify what is working and what doesn't. He needs enough reps to develop an understanding of what can be controlled. I think the USC game gave us an excellent understanding of what works and doesn't against very capable players across the board. If I am right, big if -- I know, then we will see a clear win against NI next week. I don't quite have the same confidence with Cosgrove, but with what I saw on the field, I do think there were game adjustments, but, a few breakdowns of assignments and bad breaks lost the game in the end. There is no accounting for a bad bounce on the foot of a player running away from the kick. Just the mathmatical probability of that is so high...
Click to expand...

But isn't that a damning point in itself? That makes me think Brewster came into this job with no idea what kind of team he wanted to run and simply went with what was hot at the given time. At least Rich Rod over at Michigan has stuck with the spread, despite the early troubles, because it is his offensive philosophy.

As a head coach recruiting is just one of the many things you should have a plan for. If it took Brewster 4 years (maybe 5) to develop his offensive philosophy then he clearly was not ready to be a head coach.

This isn't a Bill Walsh changing the game of football by developing the West Coast offense. This is suppose to be a guy who knows what he wants to do with his team.
 

Wheaton said:
As a head coach recruiting is just one of the many things you should have a plan for. If it took Brewster 4 years (maybe 5) to develop his offensive philosophy then he clearly was not ready to be a head coach.
Click to expand...

The question shouldn't be 'was he ready to be a head coach 4 years ago'. Who cares? The question is has he learned enough on the job to have a successful future here? You can't change the past, only look forward.
 

ruralgopher said:
The question shouldn't be 'was he ready to be a head coach 4 years ago'. Who cares? The question is has he learned enough on the job to have a successful future here? You can't change the past, only look forward.
Click to expand...

Well then I ask you what progress has he done in four years to tell you he has learned what it takes to be a coach in the Big Ten?

If he can somehow beat a team that matters to us as fans (Wisconsin, Iowa) maybe he has learned.
 

Wheaton said:
Well then I ask you what progress has he done in four years to tell you he has learned what it takes to be a coach in the Big Ten?

If he can somehow beat a team that matters to us as fans (Wisconsin, Iowa) maybe he has learned.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying he has or hasn't, can or can't. What I'm saying is that it isn't his fault that he was hired for a job he was unqualified for. I like the current offense, I wish we played more man coverage at times, but I am not a defensive coordinator. If you, like many, think that the way for MN to compete in the Big Ten is to play football like WI and IA you are in luck because that is EXACTLY what we are doing now. With WI coordinators to boot.
 

ruralgopher said:
I'm not saying he has or hasn't, can or can't. What I'm saying is that it isn't his fault that he was hired for a job he was unqualified for. I like the current offense, I wish we played more man coverage at times, but I am not a defensive coordinator. If you, like many, think that the way for MN to compete in the Big Ten is to play football like WI and IA you are in luck because that is EXACTLY what we are doing now. With WI coordinators to boot.
Click to expand...

So are we suppose to feel sorry for him and allow him more time? No one made him apply for this job, no one made him work with his agent vigorously for the interview process.

I would assume he thought he could handle it when he applied and if he was wrong then he should resign and save everyone the trouble.

It is not enough to simply "play" like Iowa and Wisconsin, Brew needs to find out how they recruit and how they develop talent like these two programs so that we may actually stand a chance to bring home the Ax and Floyd. Because obviously Brew has lesser talented players on his roster as he is defeated against both teams.
 

I feal like I'm banging my head against a wall here. Instead of thinking of this as year 4 under Brew, consider it Year 2 under the new system. He made early mistakes and has addressed them. Does that mean he gets a pass for it? Of course not, BUT the question, again, is has he learned enough to build a program going forward? You can answer that any way you want, but I think that is the question. I am not advocating for him to stay, just trying to frame the argument a bit differently.
 

ruralgopher said:
I feal like I'm banging my head against a wall here. Instead of thinking of this as year 4 under Brew, consider it Year 2 under the new system. He made early mistakes and has addressed them. Does that mean he gets a pass for it? Of course not, BUT the question, again, is has he learned enough to build a program going forward? You can answer that any way you want, but I think that is the question. I am not advocating for him to stay, just trying to frame the argument a bit differently.
Click to expand...

Ok I guess I can accept this (and I don't believe you do), but that is asking a lot to just pretend the past four years under Brew never happened. You say he does not get a pass for his mistakes, but us as fans and critics of the program are essentially giving him a pass by doing that.

I know those years weren't fun, but it is also not fair to the athletes who played to just pretend those past four years didn't happen.

Once again, you obviously didn't mean forget the past 4 year literally. Lets not forget that this guy came in and whether he believed himself or not has always talked about Rose Bowls and Big Ten Championships, so it seems to me that we should always have been competitive. Not just next year.
 

Talk is what? Cheap!

I could care less if Brewster said the goal of the football team was to take the earnings from winning the Rose Bowl and build a rocket ship to toss Adam Weber around the world a few times. It would be merely talk. Amusing and somewhat strange, but still talk.

Why wouldn't a coach come in and say he wants to take the team to the Rose Bowl and win? Just asking. Did'nt turn out that way.

Maturi had something in mind when he brought Brewster in. There was a vision in his head, a long range one, at that. Let me try to read it through some historical analysis.

Mason did not earn his big paycheck because he started to mail in his work. Terminated

Maturi looks for a new coach and is trying to maintain all athletic scholarships during a financial wreck and needs to hire a coach that has sound potential, yet is a little higher risk. He also wants that hire to understand that a new foundation of recruiting, marketing the new stadium, and improving the value of the program where imperatives. This included working with the high schools in Minnesota. Reintegrate the program with the state.

Brewster interviews. Maturi lays out his foundation. A program that runs on integrity, academics, integrates the team back to the state, is attractive to national athletes, honors its history and tradition, ends the year by contributing to the strength of the Athletic Department and the University financially, and ends by winning on the field.

Where do we stand with Brewster? All but one of those conditions have been met and honored. The last one, becomes more difficult to exam. But, we have just begun to illuminate the conditions of the job. If we bring in a new coach, the same values as described above must continue and improvement on the field of play must improve. Brewster was not brought in for his on field coaching experience, but for his general managment. In that regard, I give Brewster high marks. It is his coaching philosophy to lean on his coordinators to win on the field. In that regard, I think he has a chance to succeed. But, I am not certain that Cosgrove is the man for the defense. This years recruiting scheme is short on linemen and secondary, a major failing and a classic Minnesota mistake. Cosgrove needs to get on the ball not only with this season, plan for and land solid talent for his defense. The next four years are going to be awful if he doesn't land talent before February.
 

Nice one Olg G.

I was going to put up a new thread alluding to just what you posted But I'll just add on instead since you've got it going already. A schools success is defined by the strength of the architecture of the overall program. When the Big ten split up the conference we were considered a poorly performing University when looked at over the last 12 years. And we all know it goes on much further back than that. Our success isn't borne of bad luck and poorly chosen coaches it's a direct reflection on the overall football climate that the University created through neglect.

You need to have top facilities, top education, great opportunities for players as both athletes and students. You need to be able to instill into parents that their children will be well cared for and have a successful experience. There is just so much that plays into why talented kids would or would not come to Minnesota. The best coach in the world could not make this pig shine. The best coach in the world could not consistently win here. Because the best kids would never come here, and the Big Ten is a top conference.

Enter Bruinicks and Maturi. They are administrators/managers. They understand the product. They know that success cannot occur until the architecture is in place. They also know it's a long process. And so they build the stadium and they bring in a coach who will sell the program, raise the academic standards and begin the process of elevating the talent level. Do they want to win. you betchya. But they understand that winning is a result, it's the outcome after all other components are put in play.

I'm sure they hoped/hope Brewster would be the guy to take this program all the way. But it wasn't a necessary outcome from his hire. His hire was merely to do what he has done over the course of the last four years.

We now have better talent, better academics, national exposure on the recruiting front. Since Brew has been here they've talked about him nationally in one year more than Mase got in his entire career. The State was abuzz about him from the beginning and the high schools began to open up.

So we can say what we want, but from the standpoint of building a progran, from the vantage point of where we are in the process. Brew has been an enormous success. But we enter a new phase.

Now it's time to win. But don't be fooled into thinking that Bruinicks and Maturi are looking at the last four years as a failure like us rubes are. They are quite happy, but ready for the next level. With or without Brew.
 

josh087 said:
It hardly takes a stalker to understand your posting history. Good God, you're in every thread with the same message repeatedly over the last week-and-a-half. Do you not realize this???
Click to expand...

So I'm guessing you completely missed my posts along the lines of "Brewster deserves a 5th year"..."We should beat NIU" & the like then huh?

Selective reading is a forum epidemic...
 

Schnoodler said:
Nice one Olg G.

So we can say what we want, but from the standpoint of building a progran, from the vantage point of where we are in the process. Brew has been an enormous success. But we enter a new phase.

Now it's time to win. But don't be fooled into thinking that Bruinicks and Maturi are looking at the last four years as a failure like us rubes are. They are quite happy, but ready for the next level. With or without Brew.
Click to expand...

Quite right. The question isn't about how to start over. The question is how do we move forward from here. Brewster has repaired a significant amount of damage to the program. The question is can he continue to improve the program. I think we can see the following scenario happen. Maturi retires. In his place Brewster ascends to Athletic Director, which I think is a promotion. I don't know if that is an attractive place for Brew or not, but it may be in the cards. I don't think Brewster should leave. But, staying on in another capacity should be examined.
 


You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom