Just wins as a measure?

[Gopherhurrin]

Actually, it is very cut and dry. The elite teams recruit very well most all of the time. In any case, a two win Big Ten season would move us into last place over the last four years. Would that not hurt either? Time to win some football games. Play ball!

 

[dpodoll68]

Actually, it is very cut and dry.

False. How does a 1-11 Minnesota team finish #17 in the country in the recruiting rankings?

How do BSU and TCU do very well every year and yet their recruiting rankings generally suck?

 

[Gopherhurrin]

I do not care about "recruiting rankings", I care about effective recruiting that wins games. Recruiting guys who never play is not effective and does not win games.

 

[GoAUpher]

I do not care about "recruiting rankings", I care about effective recruiting that wins games. Recruiting guys who never play is not effective and does not win games.

You've moved into classic territory here. How are you quantifying the quality of recruiting if you discard rankings? Some nebulous undefined category of "effective" that you select? You've outdone yourself now.

 

[GopherGack]

You've moved into classic territory here. How are you quantifying the quality of recruiting if you discard rankings? Some nebulous undefined category of "effective" that you select? You've outdone yourself now.

You mean versus the nebulous undefined category of "stars" that some other random person selects?

Is years 7-10 of a coach's regime larger, about the same or less than years 1-4?

To be fair Mason did win 12 games in his first 4 years and was 11 points away from being undefeated and a 3 point loss in OT to Wisconsin from going to the Rosebowl in his 3rd year. He also had 3 wins against Iowa/Wisconsin by year 4. (I'm really don't want to get into a Brewster vs. Mason argument and yes I did think it was time for Mason to go. I'm only pointing out that compared to recent new hires at the U, Brewster is behind.)

 

[Mulligan]

How about we see how game one goes, then game two, then game three. He will be evaluated every step of the way. If they beat the teams they should and improve each week, expectations will rise. How they handle those expectations is what I am concerned with. Every time in the past the media and fans have become excited, they have fallen flat.

+ 1

Silly to throw out a specific number where his season is deemed a success or failure; or where he keeps his job or we start over. Not that it matters, but I'm looking just as much at two other things.

One, avoiding bad losses. We need to win games where we're favored or even and we need to avoid getting blown-out. Avoid the blow-outs and you always have a chance. Win the ones you're favored or even and the win total will be fine.

Two, we need to show improvement in simply playing good football. Lots of penalties, bad interceptions, blown pass coverage, poor special team play, plays for big losses, etc. are going to indicate poor coaching. I'd much rather have a tough loss against a Big Ten team than a win like the debacle against South Dakota State last year.

 

[Gopherhurrin]

You've moved into classic territory here. How are you quantifying the quality of recruiting if you discard rankings? Some nebulous undefined category of "effective" that you select? You've outdone yourself now.

Wins? I'm sorry, is there some other measure of effectiveness?