Kill and MN kids

Donate To GopherHole
I didn't remember Athey at all; he threw 90 passes in 11 games as a senior. I see he has since transferred to Illinois State and is listed as a TE.
 


GophersInIowa said:
Also, so kids who go out of state to play don't work as hard as those who play for their hometown team? Imagine what Adrian Peterson could have done in college if he would have just stayed in Texas to play.
Click to expand...
This isn't what he said, but in-state or nearby players are FAR less likely to transfer or dropout at any point in their careers. That's one reason why I think local kids should get the nod in any close cases.
 

Herd said:
MN will have players from all over the country, but to have a core of MN players that bleed maroon and give everything for their university would help the team. You disagree? I watched the post game interviews after a recent national championship. It was special for everyone, but it was emotional, gut wrenchng and a lifelong dream for the in state players to win a championship for the team they grew up wanting to play for. That's sometimes hard to find in a California recruit playing in MN.
Click to expand...
That's sometimes hard to find in a Minnesota recruit as well.
 

Breakin' The Plane said:
Eden Prairie confuses me. As dominant as they've been over the years, doesn't it seem like they should have more D1 recruits? I'm sure I'm just out of the loop, but I can't remember the last time a QB, RB or WR from EP went on to play D1 football.
Click to expand...
Two guys this year alone (Cotrell and Tyson Reinke). No school in Minnesota produces all that many D1 recruits.
 


Herd said:
MN will have players from all over the country, but to have a core of MN players that bleed maroon and give everything for their university would help the team. You disagree? I watched the post game interviews after a recent national championship. It was special for everyone, but it was emotional, gut wrenchng and a lifelong dream for the in state players to win a championship for the team they grew up wanting to play for. That's sometimes hard to find in a California recruit playing in MN.
Click to expand...

Hope you are not talking about NDSU, which I am sure you are. If you are, most here could care less. Including myself.
 


gopherguy05 said:
If you look at his previous posts....it isn't sarcasm. There is a small but vocal group on this Site that have no idea how recruiting works in the current age.
Click to expand...

I would like your explanation of how recruiting works in the current age. It seems like some of you feel it works like just pursuing the top ranked players with the most stars. Then if you don't get them, you give up.

In my opinion, you recruit the best players you can find 1) from an athletic standpoint, 2) that fit your style of play, and 3) that will help your lockeroom and your team unity. That may or may not point to how many stars they have behind their name on a recruiting site. Stars behind their names might not be best for MN if they are not committed to MN and to team.

I just think about what a guy like Grant Olson with leadership ability and passion for the game would have done for MN. By your recruiting standards, he would be passed over quickly for 1-2", 15 Lbs, and 2 Stars. That type of a miss is big for a school like MN. You are always going to miss on players, but you don't want a recruiting model in place that leaves off key intangibles.
 

Herd said:
In my opinion, you recruit the best players you can find 1) from an athletic standpoint, 2) that fit your style of play, and 3) that will help your lockeroom and your team unity. That may or may not point to how many stars they have behind their name on a recruiting site. Stars behind their names might not be best for MN if they are not committed to MN and to team.
Click to expand...

If you would have said that the Gopher coaching staff should recruit along this formula, everyone would have agreed with you. Everyone thinks they should factor in ability, fit and character.

No one took issue with this point.

The point that people are mocking you for is that you seem to think that automatically suggests that the U needs to offer more MN kids. There isn't a nexus between those two schools of thought. What if the kid who is the better fit happens to be from Texas? Your assumption is that he wouldn't be from Texas and that assumption is where people are disagreeing with you.

You also don't have a very firm stance on the situation. You're essentially saying that it doesn't matter how many kids the U recruits from MN, they need to recruit more (which is also in contradiction with your new stance). What if those kids don't measure up in your new three prong analysis? I'm sure that's what kept Marcus Williams from getting a scholarship at the U (there were concerns about his character and he proved people wrong).
 




Bob_Loblaw said:
If you would have said that the Gopher coaching staff should recruit along this formula, everyone would have agreed with you. Everyone thinks they should factor in ability, fit and character.

No one took issue with this point.

The point that people are mocking you for is that you seem to think that automatically suggests that the U needs to offer more MN kids. There isn't a nexus between those two schools of thought. What if the kid who is the better fit happens to be from Texas? Your assumption is that he wouldn't be from Texas and that assumption is where people are disagreeing with you.

You also don't have a very firm stance on the situation. You're essentially saying that it doesn't matter how many kids the U recruits from MN, they need to recruit more (which is also in contradiction with your new stance). What if those kids don't measure up in your new three prong analysis? I'm sure that's what kept Marcus Williams from getting a scholarship at the U (there were concerns about his character and he proved people wrong).
Click to expand...

You haven't answered how one recruits in the current age. Enlighten me. I'm guessing it involves a scale, tape measure and computer, but enlighten me. How does MN continue to get beat by teams that have lesser talent on paper, although 2012 was greatly improved. There has been a major lack of cohesiveness and structure in the program since Mason, and that has zero to do with talent level. Kill is bringing that back. Unity and team = overachieving and being better than the sum of your parts. You can win a lot of games with lesser talent, good scheme, and a united team.
 

I think it's funny you're calling out Bob L. In my opinion he's one of the best posters and knowledgeable without being a homer.
 




Herd said:
You haven't answered how one recruits in the current age. Enlighten me. I'm guessing it involves a scale, tape measure and computer, but enlighten me. How does MN continue to get beat by teams that have lesser talent on paper, although 2012 was greatly improved. There has been a major lack of cohesiveness and structure in the program since Mason, and that has zero to do with talent level. Kill is bringing that back. Unity and team = overachieving and being better than the sum of your parts. You can win a lot of games with lesser talent, good scheme, and a united team.
Click to expand...

Wait for it.......

I bet he mentions we should be more like NDSU. :rolleyes:
 

Interesting discussion. Without question talent is by far the number one answer to any football program (Youth, HighSchool or College). Nick Saban asked the Alabama AD, after accepting the head coaching job, what do you think you have in me? The AD looked at Saban and said, "we have the best head football coach in the nation." Saban laughed at the AD and said, "no you don't, but you do have the best dam recruiter in the country." For the U of M to continue to climb the ladder, it all starts with recruiting. You can't teach speed or size and you can't coach heart.
 

pharmacygopher said:
I think it's funny you're calling out Bob L. In my opinion he's one of the best posters and knowledgeable without being a homer.
Click to expand...

No offense to Bob or anyone else. Just trying to understand why "Recruiting" is an end all excuse to losing. It should not be, and hopefully that mentality goes away. Competing with anyone should be the new mentality.
 

GoldenGopher88 said:
Interesting discussion. Without question talent is by far the number one answer to any football program (Youth, HighSchool or College). Nick Saban asked the Alabama AD, after accepting the head coaching job, what do you think you have in me? The AD looked at Saban and said, "we have the best head football coach in the nation." Saban laughed at the AD and said, "no you don't, but you do have the best dam recruiter in the country." For the U of M to continue to climb the ladder, it all starts with recruiting. You can't teach speed or size and you can't coach heart.
Click to expand...

Talent doesn't just walk in the door, it is developed. As much as you recruit it or even more, you develop size and speed with training and nuitrition. Player development success varies greatly from program to program, it is not a given.. Maybe MN is already in the 95th percentile, I don't know, but player development is so important. It does not end with recruiting.
 

Herd said:
No offense to Bob or anyone else. Just trying to understand why "Recruiting" is an end all excuse to losing. It should not be, and hopefully that mentality goes away. Competing with anyone should be the new mentality.
Click to expand...

I really don't mean this in an offensive way, and I'm trying to figure out a way to word this without sounding snarky but you are continuously avoiding the discussion by changing the discussion (and your stance) every time anyone asks you about your stance.

I never said that "recruiting" is the end all. In fact, I think it's really only part of the process. How big of a part largely depends upon your definition of recruiting. Does it include attrition, players more likely to develop, etc? I digress, but the point is that I never said that recruiting has been our problem over the years and I've never even hinted to it being THE excuse for us losing. It's never happened. So no offense taken.

However, we all responded to a recruiting thread CREATED BY YOU, in which you have fallen off course in a weird way.

#1: You started a thread based on the fact that we needed to RECRUIT more MN kids. That was the point of your initial postings.
- - - - People questioned what you meant by "more", people pointed out that we do recruit a lot of MN kids, etc.

#2: You changed midstream to your three prong approach to RECRUITING in which you said it should be based upon: (1) athletic ability; (2) fit to the system; (3) character issues.
- - - - - I asked you why you changed your view on recruiting (never said it was the only thing that mattered)

#3: Now you question why everyone is talking about recruiting.
 

Herd said:
You haven't answered how one recruits in the current age. Enlighten me. I'm guessing it involves a scale, tape measure and computer, but enlighten me. How does MN continue to get beat by teams that have lesser talent on paper, although 2012 was greatly improved. There has been a major lack of cohesiveness and structure in the program since Mason, and that has zero to do with talent level. Kill is bringing that back. Unity and team = overachieving and being better than the sum of your parts. You can win a lot of games with lesser talent, good scheme, and a united team.
Click to expand...

Who did we get beat by last year that had less talent on paper?

It happened other years for a combo of reasons, bad coaching, devastating attrition, and no depth/experience.

As far as HOW you recruit in today's age...well, I think it's similar to anytime. You study the athletes and you try to get the best ones who are the best fit and who aren't character liabilities to come to your school and play.

This often involves summer camps, junior days, going and watching the kids play in person, tape of their games, meeting with their coaches, etc. It's all similar to how it's been done for years but it's a digital age so sharing that info is done quicker.

As far as never answering the question, I was never asked the question and the question has nothing to do with my last posting. My last posting was merely to point out that you've changed directions from the "More MN Mantra" to your new three pronged approach that pretty much everyone agrees with.
 

Herd said:
Talent doesn't just walk in the door, it is developed. As much as you recruit it or even more, you develop size and speed with training and nuitrition. Player development success varies greatly from program to program, it is not a given.. Maybe MN is already in the 95th percentile, I don't know, but player development is so important. It does not end with recruiting.
Click to expand...


AGAIN, back to your original point. What does that have to do with a kid from MN and a kid from TX? Isn't that true no matter where the kid is born?

Have you completely abandoned your MN point or are you now arguing that kids from MN are more capable of following a nutrition recommendation than a kid from TX? More capable of growing from lifting weights than a kid from TX?
 

Bob_Loblaw said:
I really don't mean this in an offensive way, and I'm trying to figure out a way to word this without sounding snarky but you are continuously avoiding the discussion by changing the discussion (and your stance) every time anyone asks you about your stance.

I never said that "recruiting" is the end all. In fact, I think it's really only part of the process. How big of a part largely depends upon your definition of recruiting. Does it include attrition, players more likely to develop, etc? I digress, but the point is that I never said that recruiting has been our problem over the years and I've never even hinted to it being THE excuse for us losing. It's never happened. So no offense taken.

However, we all responded to a recruiting thread CREATED BY YOU, in which you have fallen off course in a weird way.

#1: You started a thread based on the fact that we needed to RECRUIT more MN kids. That was the point of your initial postings.
- - - - People questioned what you meant by "more", people pointed out that we do recruit a lot of MN kids, etc.

#2: You changed midstream to your three prong approach to RECRUITING in which you said it should be based upon: (1) athletic ability; (2) fit to the system; (3) character issues.
- - - - - I asked you why you changed your view on recruiting (never said it was the only thing that mattered)

#3: Now you question why everyone is talking about recruiting.
Click to expand...

#1: I feel that if there was an emphasis on in state recruiting, the team would have more heart. I think Kill agrees with me and is trying to do so, thus the emphasis on the PWO program. If all you look at is Stars, many times MN recruiting is de-emphsized, and that's not good.
#2: Focusing on recruiting ratings is not the end all. You don't lose games in February. Player development can turn a marginal recruit into a starter, leader or great player. Losing to Ohio state in the recruiting ratings doesn't mean anything if the right players are brought in that fit the need and style of play.
#: I questioned why people give up and concede defeat after recruiting season. Developing players and a winning attitude is just as important. You can't bring in DIII players, but you should be able to develop recruited DI players and compete. You say that everyone develops players, everyone develops a winning attitude . . . I say there is much variiation. Brewster did neither, Kill is much better.
 

Let me take a crack at this:

When there's an outstanding kid/s in MN, of course the Gophers will be recruiting him/them. But, other schools will be recruiting them, too. And, let's not forget, some kids want to get away from home, away from the parents, and see if the grass is greener (and the girls hotter) on the other side of the fence. It's not like the Gophers have a territorial draft choice to use. So, some of the elite players from MN are going to go elsewhere. Yes, the Gophs will get their share, but they'll lose some, too.

I think the real question - hinted at in the original post - is this: should the Gophs put a priority on going after the 2nd-tier MN recruits, INSTEAD of going after similar-caliber players from out of state?
That's harder to answer. It depends on what the coaches are looking for. I would think (and hope) that if the Gophs are evaluating recruits, and two recruits grade out the same, they would give some preference to the MN kid over an out-of-state kid. But, if the out-of-state kids grade out higher, then they're not going to take a lower-rated MN kid just to keep MN fans happy.

Sad but true fact of life - the home-town hero may not be as good as a kid from TX or FLA. At least, he may not be as good a fit for what the coaches want.
 

Herd-understanding that talent doesn't just walk in the door, which I never implied. Use the following as an example, some attributes cannot be coached or developed. You say speed can be developed? To what extent? You can take a 5.0 40 player and make him into a 4.4 kid? Please let me know where I can find this coach? All kidding aside, players have vast and different talent levels. Player development does come into minor consideration, but how much can you upside a player? Would you prefer to have Michigan/Ohio State's recruiting class this year or Minnesota's? I think we all know the answer. If your putting stock in a bunch of 2 star vs. 4 star recruits, with the thought that we'll coach them up, good luck. Players make plays, not coaches.
 

e.bigelow said:
UGH. You gotta love that. I have noticed a few of them pop up from time to time. I usually do not comment to much on the recruiting process as I do not get to see a lot of the metro kids play out in West Central MN. I get to see there highlight video's, but that is about it. So, I usually comment when I am impressed by a player, but they are always typically on our radar.

It is just funny to read these people that think we REALLY missed on these kids that are at NDSU, etc. Typically, there is a reason they ended up at NDSU, UNI, wherever, be that grades, physical size, experience or whatever. It just compounds for them we we "miss" on players that we bring in from out of state who may be close to similar caliber (i.e., star ratings, recruit ratings, what have you) to an instate player that went to a FCS or smaller college and preforms well.

What can you do I guess?
Click to expand...

Okay, but there are also reasons why players from Florida end up at MN and not FSU, Florida, etc.. I think some of yoga re kidding yourselves if you do not think that some of the guys at NDSU wouldn't help at the U of M. It would be one thing if it was a miss on one or two. But there are multiple misses. I'm just trying to be realistic. I understand how recruiting works, believe me. At some point Kill, has to compete against the big boys and get some players. That is not even close to happening now. Some of the guys he is bringing in will be do well and be very good. However, collectively, understand it is going to be a long uphill climb to get to relevance in the Big Ten when you are battling it out with San Jose State, Army, Western Michigan, Southern Mississippi, and schools of that caliber when you are recruiting players from miles away. And one thing we have learned about Kill and his staff so far is they are not miracle workers. A 4-12 record in the Big Ten proves that.
 

3399 said:
Okay, but there are also reasons why players from Florida end up at MN and not FSU, Florida, etc.. I think some of yoga re kidding yourselves if you do not think that some of the guys at NDSU wouldn't help at the U of M. It would be one thing if it was a miss on one or two. But there are multiple misses. I'm just trying to be realistic. I understand how recruiting works, believe me. At some point Kill, has to compete against the big boys and get some players. That is not even close to happening now. Some of the guys he is bringing in will be do well and be very good. However, collectively, understand it is going to be a long uphill climb to get to relevance in the Big Ten when you are battling it out with San Jose State, Army, Western Michigan, Southern Mississippi, and schools of that caliber when you are recruiting players from miles away. And one thing we have learned about Kill and his staff so far is they are not miracle workers. A 4-12 record in the Big Ten proves that.
Click to expand...

For all the misses, how many players from Minnesota on NDSU's roster never end up amounting to anything?
 

We're now on the 5th page of a thread started and perpetuated by a troll. Move on.
 

All of the Minnesota kids on the NDSU are on that roster for 1 of a few reasons. They were either not talented enough or not good enough academically. None of the guys you mention should have been given more than a PWO from the U. And to say otherwise is just idiotic. Have some of them developed into players who may be able to contribute? Sure. But no coach has crystal ball that says what that player might develop into in 4 years. You take the players that are the best fit for your program. Nothing less.

And the U recruits PLENTY of in-state kids.
 

I dont care if the players are from the moon if they help us get the axe back Im all for it!
 

DLguy said:
All of the Minnesota kids on the NDSU are on that roster for 1 of a few reasons. They were either not talented enough or not good enough academically. None of the guys you mention should have been given more than a PWO from the U. And to say otherwise is just idiotic. Have some of them developed into players who may be able to contribute? Sure. But no coach has crystal ball that says what that player might develop into in 4 years. You take the players that are the best fit for your program. Nothing less.

And the U recruits PLENTY of in-state kids.
Click to expand...

+1. EXACTLY!
 

Coolew01 said:
For all the misses, how many players from Minnesota on NDSU's roster never end up amounting to anything?
Click to expand...

Don't you see, none of them were misses. We should have recruited all of them.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom