Last FOUR Gopher recruiting classes: What letter grade would you give them?

Donate To GopherHole
L

LonelyIowaGopher

Banned
Joined
Jan 23, 2011
Messages
167
Reaction score
0
Points
16
Last week's biggest thread asked the question, "What letter grade would you give the 2011 Gopher recruiting class?" Roughly fifty percent of those who responded gave it a C and about thirty percent gave it a B. I'd call the total score a C+.

What letter grade would you give the last four Gopher recruiting classes? I would give them a B but ask this question for several reasons:

1. I'd give Wisconsin's last four recruiting classes a grade no better than B (if that). If Minnesota's recruiting has been on a par with that of the Badgers for four years, the Gophers should be much more competitive in the Big 10 than they have been in recent years.

2. I've been surprised to learn here that some of Brewster's recruits never made it into school and more than a few others dropped off the team for one reason or another. This can--and, now, should--be factored into the grading of Brewster's classes.

3. In a way, Brewster recruited to Kill's systems. Kill runs a multiple-set offense. Brewster employed over four years three of the elements of a multiple-set offense (spread, pro-set and power running game). I also think--to his considerable credit--Brewster put some of his best recruits on the defensive side of the ball. Mason NEVER did this.

4. Finally, this question will allow highwayman and others to recalculate the ratio between the number of threads I start versus the total number of comments I post. Apparently, that calculation is crucial to the future of Minnesota Gopher football.
 

LonelyIowaGopher said:
Last week's biggest thread asked the question, "What letter grade would you give the 2011 Gopher recruiting class?" Roughly fifty percent of those who responded gave it a C and about thirty percent gave it a B. I'd call the total score a C+.

What letter grade would you give the last four Gopher recruiting classes? I would give them a B but ask this question for several reasons:

1. I'd give Wisconsin's last four recruiting classes a grade no better than B (if that). If Minnesota's recruiting has been on a par with that of the Badgers for four years, the Gophers should be much more competitive in the Big 10 than they have been in recent years.

2. I've been surprised to learn here that some of Brewster's recruits never made it into school and more than a few others dropped off the team for one reason or another. This can--and, now, should--be factored into the grading of Brewster's classes.

3. In a way, Brewster recruited to Kill's systems. Kill runs a multiple-set offense. Brewster employed over four years three of the elements of a multiple-set offense (spread, pro-set and power running game). I also think--to his considerable credit--Brewster put some of his best recruits on the defensive side of the ball. Mason NEVER did this.

4. Finally, this question will allow highwayman and others to recalculate the ratio between the number of threads I start versus the total number of comments I post. Apparently, that calculation is crucial to the future of Minnesota Gopher football.
Click to expand...

1. Depends how you want to look at it. Are you just going by what the players stars and offers were when they signed with wisconsin, or are you looking at what kind of players the recruits became? On paper, the recruiting classes have looked pretty close. But Wisconsin has gotten a lot more out of the recruits.

2. I agree completely. Every program loses players to academics and other things, and we certainly had our share the past few years.

3. Yes and no. They did run a bunch of different sets, but not at the same time. The various sets that are run in Kill's offense are within his system, where as the different sets ran under Brewster were under different systems.

4. This is why it is so hard to take you seriously some times. I honestly think you like the attention, therefore you bring this up and pretty much invite an argument.
 

GophersinIowa,
1. What grade do you give?
2. I don't have to post a comment like #4 for regular posters to go off on my posts.
 




LonelyIowaGopher said:
Last week's biggest thread asked the question, "What letter grade would you give the 2011 Gopher recruiting class?" Roughly fifty percent of those who responded gave it a C and about thirty percent gave it a B. I'd call the total score a C+.

What letter grade would you give the last four Gopher recruiting classes? I would give them a B but ask this question for several reasons:

1. I'd give Wisconsin's last four recruiting classes a grade no better than B (if that). If Minnesota's recruiting has been on a par with that of the Badgers for four years, the Gophers should be much more competitive in the Big 10 than they have been in recent years.

2. I've been surprised to learn here that some of Brewster's recruits never made it into school and more than a few others dropped off the team for one reason or another. This can--and, now, should--be factored into the grading of Brewster's classes.

3. In a way, Brewster recruited to Kill's systems. Kill runs a multiple-set offense. Brewster employed over four years three of the elements of a multiple-set offense (spread, pro-set and power running game). I also think--to his considerable credit--Brewster put some of his best recruits on the defensive side of the ball. Mason NEVER did this.

4. Finally, this question will allow highwayman and others to recalculate the ratio between the number of threads I start versus the total number of comments I post. Apparently, that calculation is crucial to the future of Minnesota Gopher football.
Click to expand...

Incomplete. We need to first see what effect a real coach has on them.
 

LonelyIowaGopher said:
GophersinIowa,
1. What grade do you give?
2. I don't have to post a comment like #4 for regular posters to go off on my posts.
Click to expand...

1. I'd give it a C. On paper it's a B but a there's a good amount of the "top talent" that haven't played much or at all at the U. Some was just bad luck (Maresh, Bryant Allen), some were a risk to begin with (Whaley, Lipscomb).
2. But you making those comments doesn't help, that's for sure.
 

How are you wanting these classes judged?

Do you want them judged according to how productive they have been? Or are you trying to make a point about recruiting class rankings of our last four classes to determine what our chances for success might be?
 

Bob,
I guess I'm somewhere in between the two alternatives you suggested. There is no question more is known about the relative performance of the earlier recruits and I think that should be factored into the equation. On the other hand, many of Brewster's recruits have a lot of unknowns about them--just as the 2011 class does.

What I'm trying to get a feel for is how people who've followed the Gophers more closely than I can in Iowa feel about the potential of the players Kill and his staff will have to work with next year. My working assumptions are that Brewster recruited a higher number of quality athletes per year than Mason did. Brewster also put more of his best athletes on the defensive side of the ball. Bud Grant always said, "Defense wins championships." Mason lost a lot of games because his defenses were so terrible.

The reason I gave the four classes a B ranking is that I think Minnesota has athletes that compare to those at schools in the top half of the Big 10. Not the very top teams--especially Ohio State--but closer to Wisconsin and even Iowa than they've been for awhile.

If I'm right--and I have little idea about this, which is why I'm asking the question--and Kill is the coach I think he is, the Gopher could be surprisingly good over the next two or three years.
 



You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom