Official 2015 Recruiting Updates Thread: Links, Tweets, Videos, Stories, Rumors, etc.

Donate To GopherHole
beatles said:
Perfectly stated thank you! When someone'e entire argument is based on star ratings it means they just don't get it.
Click to expand...
When people completely discount the recruiting rankings based on anecdotal evidence it is equally ignorant. There have been several articles over the years (one by MV from Daily Gopher included I believe) that show the statistical validity of the recruiting rankings over the population of college football. Of course you can find individuals that over or under perform, but the rankings are valid predictors of success on the whole. Of course if you think there is some kind of conspiracy that only ranks highly the players that commit to certain schools I'm afraid you are beyond hope.
 

Ski U Master said:
When people completely discount the recruiting rankings based on anecdotal evidence it is equally ignorant. There have been several articles over the years (one by MV from Daily Gopher included I believe) that show the statistical validity of the recruiting rankings over the population of college football. Of course you can find individuals that over or under perform, but the rankings are valid predictors of success on the whole. Of course if you think there is some kind of conspiracy that only ranks highly the players that commit to certain schools I'm afraid you are beyond hope.
Click to expand...

So what? The fact of the matter is that THIS STAFF has their own way to evaluate the players that they recruit and NO outside rankings go into that. So if the staff feels confident that the players brought in can fit what the coaches want, I am in the camp that says "who cares how other entities grade those same players". There are no wins or losses generated on signing day, PERIOD. Let the outside entities grade all they want, but I can easily dismiss them because they are not what is making this program develop (#BrickByBrick).

See above to beatles point and understand that you just don't get it. We can agree to disagree that is fine, but I rather see play on the field predict success instead of the recruits coming in. Because in all actuality, the impact this group of recruits will have on the upcoming season is likely not going to be that big. There may be a small handful of players that play this season but for the most part the great majority will be red-shirted and have ZERO bearing on this season anyways...

But hey, maybe I just don't get it either
 

http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/ncf.../id/66469/recruiting-qa-minnesotas-jerry-kill

Ooooooppps didn't realize it was an insider article

Here is the snippet I wanted to highlight (If this breaks the rules - please delete)

Brian Bennett: You loaded up on defensive backs and the offensive line. Was that the plan going in?

Jerry Kill: Yeah. We have a very, very talented secondary coming back this year, and we're going to lose four of those young people. So we felt like we had to load up this class to make sure we have the depth that we need the following year. And then we'll still add some more the next year. The good thing is, we've had a lot of evaluations on every kid and did our homework, and they can all really run. We've got some guys that are long and some kids in the 5-foot-10, 5-11 range with good ball skills.

The offensive line, I feel very, very good about. I think it's the best up-front class we've signed since we've been here. They're big, they're athletic and we're still recruiting one. I felt like we really, really improved ourselves up front. We needed it, and we're real excited about it.
 

EliteOpinionGuy said:
You make absolutely NO sense with your typing (wish I could call it an argument but it just your stupidity via a keyboard) because you are unable to see what recruiting rankings are.... Since the sites who look to sell subscriptions to the public (you) and want to keep people coming in so they need to always have "new" rankings or "updated" info. Really all this is, is something to catch your attention and allow you to justify why you pay for the subscription in the first place.

But to get to the way Jerry Kill recruits (and has stated multiple times) they look for/evaluate players that the staff feels are specific body types and levels of athletism that can be coached while looking to find players that personally are fits for the U. This evaluation is completly irrelavent to the ESPNs and Rival.coms of the world because those are to sell subscriptions and Kills staff evaluates in order to KEEP THEIR JOB by getting the best players that fit what they want to do.

I cannot care any less whether or not personally you ever "get it" and are done with the complaining about how nationally we can't recruit because some expert says there are 50 classes better than us. But it is indicative to the level of comprehension you have since you can only validate how good you think the staff recruits is ONLY based on national rankings.... Not that the staff has been able to BEAT squads who supposedly out recruit them, but ONLY based on the national rank each year.
Click to expand...

Guy posts a common sense opinion, it doesn't fit your herd like belief.....attack him.
 

beatles said:
Perfectly stated thank you! When someone'e entire argument is based on star ratings it means they just don't get it.
Click to expand...

Yeah, because Alabama, Ohio State, Oregon, Florida State with all of their 5 star recruits, it's a lie, it doesn't matter...oh, wait, weren't they all in the Bowl Challenge? Yeah, he just doesn't get it.
 


Ski U Master said:
When people completely discount the recruiting rankings based on anecdotal evidence it is equally ignorant. There have been several articles over the years (one by MV from Daily Gopher included I believe) that show the statistical validity of the recruiting rankings over the population of college football. Of course you can find individuals that over or under perform, but the rankings are valid predictors of success on the whole. Of course if you think there is some kind of conspiracy that only ranks highly the players that commit to certain schools I'm afraid you are beyond hope.
Click to expand...
I never once claimed that I completely discount recruiting rankings so I'm not sure why you bring that up. I simply said his argument was SOLELY based on star ratings and that by itself isn't a strong argument. And if you don't think there's some truth to your last sentence then you don't pay attention. There are absolutely times when a players star rating is affected based on his offers. May not be the norm but it happens every year.
 

nasa35 said:
Yeah, because Alabama, Ohio State, Oregon, Florida State with all of their 5 star recruits, it's a lie, it doesn't matter...oh, wait, weren't they all in the Bowl Challenge? Yeah, he just doesn't get it.
Click to expand...

Ok so you're saying right now that star rating is the only way to rank players? Because he apparently does which means yes, he doesn't get it.
 

beatles said:
Ok so you're saying right now that star rating is the only way to rank players? Because he apparently does which means yes, he doesn't get it.
Click to expand...

The one variable between teams is coaching. All four of those teams have solid coaching staffs. Do they pull in the top perceived talent? You bet! Do they know how to actually maximize their potential once they get to campus? Absolutely!

Oregon didn't pull in a lot of 5 star players this year in their class. But they sure have the coaches to make the players that have successful on the field. All the talent in the world is great, but if you can't actually take that potential and field a productive team then it really doesn't matter what the star ratings were.
 




Excellent article by FiveThirtyEight showing how teams fared compared to recruiting in 2014 and overall from 2005-2014. http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/after-signing-day-wisconsin-makes-the-best-of-its-recruits/

Top 3 overachievers: Wisconsin, Oregon, Missouri
Top 3 underachievers: Indiana, Illinois, Colorado

It appears that Minnesota was accidentally left off the list, but underachieved by 9.4 points, putting us in the middle of the underachievers. There's a footnote about it at the bottom.
 

nasa35 said:
Yeah, because Alabama, Ohio State, Oregon, Florida State with all of their 5 star recruits, it's a lie, it doesn't matter...oh, wait, weren't they all in the Bowl Challenge? Yeah, he just doesn't get it.
Click to expand...

Alabama, Florida State, and Ohio State are ALL coached by staffs that have won at least one college football championship. Those schools get to almost pick and choose which players the staff wants to bring in and take. The University of Minnesota football program HOWEVER is 4 years removed from a 3-9 season and has turned the program from the bottom of the bottom tier in the B1G to the bottom of the top tier in the B1G, IN 4 YEARS. I am ok if our class does not get the outside love that other programs get becuase other programs don't have this coaching staff building and developing their recruits.

So though I, and I am sure Jerry Kill, would love to get some five star guys in here; I am not willing to discount his efforts simply becuase recruiting sites rank him behind 50 or so other classes. I just understand, and accept what Jerry Kill is trying to do and at no point is "pleasing ESPN recruiting expert X" on that list and I am fine with it. You may not be but hey, that is none of my business.
 

EliteOpinionGuy said:
You make absolutely NO sense with your typing (wish I could call it an argument but it just your stupidity via a keyboard) because you are unable to see what recruiting rankings are.... Since the sites who look to sell subscriptions to the public (you) and want to keep people coming in so they need to always have "new" rankings or "updated" info. Really all this is, is something to catch your attention and allow you to justify why you pay for the subscription in the first place.

But to get to the way Jerry Kill recruits (and has stated multiple times) they look for/evaluate players that the staff feels are specific body types and levels of athletism that can be coached while looking to find players that personally are fits for the U. This evaluation is completly irrelavent to the ESPNs and Rival.coms of the world because those are to sell subscriptions and Kills staff evaluates in order to KEEP THEIR JOB by getting the best players that fit what they want to do.

I cannot care any less whether or not personally you ever "get it" and are done with the complaining about how nationally we can't recruit because some expert says there are 50 classes better than us. But it is indicative to the level of comprehension you have since you can only validate how good you think the staff recruits is ONLY based on national rankings.... Not that the staff has been able to BEAT squads who supposedly out recruit them, but ONLY based on the national rank each year.
Click to expand...

+1 The amazing thing is that we are still having this discussion here. Does star rankings mean anything? Yes! Does being ranked 46 or 48 compared to 50 or 52 mean anything? Not really. Yet some of you actually are still having this inane discussion. Those of you who still believe that you can make meaningful conclusions using this data stay away from the stock market. They are looking for suckers like you.:rolleyes:
 

haha

beatles said:
I never once claimed that I completely discount recruiting rankings so I'm not sure why you bring that up. I simply said his argument was SOLELY based on star ratings and that by itself isn't a strong argument. And if you don't think there's some truth to your last sentence then you don't pay attention. There are absolutely times when a players star rating is affected based on his offers. May not be the norm but it happens every year.
Click to expand...

You don't solely claim anything but I'm the idiot because I do. Ha You can find lots of posts from me supporting the coaches in their evaluation and development of talent.
You can also find several comments from Jerry Kill essentially wishing he could recruit 4 star kids or gushing and praising the potential of the ones he has. He is well aware of star rankings. Yes, we recruit to our system. But, if we could get the players Alabama, USC, OSU gets we'd recruit them. Jerry says as much.

We recruit the best of what we can get for our system from the pool of guys we can get not from the entire pool of all available high school seniors. Jerry Kill is a very good football program developer, absolutely.
He'd be a better coach if he could get better players. He also says that. He is happy with the group he has. He also has no choice but to be happy with it. I'm happy with it. As I said earlier we don't know...the 2 star kids could end up being our best players. It's not the point. The point is it'd be nice to get higher rated players WHICH we would absolutely accept depending on the timing. He does have integrity, he's not going to pull an offer of a lower rated kid because some kid higher rated wants to come last minute and wasn't interested earlier.

The stars are absolutely not the only thing but they absolutely do matter. Only a fool would just dismiss the rankings. One example: Ohio State QB's Braxton Miller, starter 4 star 6.0, next up JT Barrett 4 star 5.9, and
Cardale Jones 3 star at 5.7 and the 12th rated QB for that year.
Bottom line, Jerry Kill needs higher ranked recruits for us to be a Top 10 team in the country at seasons end.
If I'm wrong I'll be happy btw You all seem to lose sight of the fact I want us to be better than we are. I'm not satisfied with 8 wins. Pleased there is improvement but it's going to take better players to keep rising.

Another point: You don't think prospective recruits pay attention to these rankings? It's harder to sell when your classes keep landing in the 50's
 



60's Guy said:
You don't solely claim anything but I'm the idiot because I do. Ha You can find lots of posts from me supporting the coaches in their evaluation and development of talent.
You can also find several comments from Jerry Kill essentially wishing he could recruit 4 star kids or gushing and praising the potential of the ones he has. He is well aware of star rankings. Yes, we recruit to our system. But, if we could get the players Alabama, USC, OSU gets we'd recruit them. Jerry says as much.

We recruit the best of what we can get for our system from the pool of guys we can get not from the entire pool of all available high school seniors. Jerry Kill is a very good football program developer, absolutely.
He'd be a better coach if he could get better players. He also says that. He is happy with the group he has. He also has no choice but to be happy with it. I'm happy with it. As I said earlier we don't know...the 2 star kids could end up being our best players. It's not the point. The point is it'd be nice to get higher rated players WHICH we would absolutely accept depending on the timing. He does have integrity, he's not going to pull an offer of a lower rated kid because some kid higher rated wants to come last minute and wasn't interested earlier.

The stars are absolutely not the only thing but they absolutely do matter. Only a fool would just dismiss the rankings. One example: Ohio State QB's Braxton Miller, starter 4 star 6.0, next up JT Barrett 4 star 5.9, and
Cardale Jones 3 star at 5.7 and the 12th rated QB for that year.
Bottom line, Jerry Kill needs higher ranked recruits for us to be a Top 10 team in the country at seasons end.
If I'm wrong I'll be happy btw You all seem to lose sight of the fact I want us to be better than we are. I'm not satisfied with 8 wins. Pleased there is improvement but it's going to take better players to keep rising.

Another point: You don't think prospective recruits pay attention to these rankings? It's harder to sell when your classes keep landing in the 50's
Click to expand...

This should've been your first post on the subject.
 

EliteOpinionGuy said:
So what? The fact of the matter is that THIS STAFF has their own way to evaluate the players that they recruit and NO outside rankings go into that. So if the staff feels confident that the players brought in can fit what the coaches want, I am in the camp that says "who cares how other entities grade those same players". There are no wins or losses generated on signing day, PERIOD. Let the outside entities grade all they want, but I can easily dismiss them because they are not what is making this program develop (#BrickByBrick).

See above to beatles point and understand that you just don't get it. We can agree to disagree that is fine, but I rather see play on the field predict success instead of the recruits coming in. Because in all actuality, the impact this group of recruits will have on the upcoming season is likely not going to be that big. There may be a small handful of players that play this season but for the most part the great majority will be red-shirted and have ZERO bearing on this season anyways...

But hey, maybe I just don't get it either
Click to expand...

all coaching staffs around the country have their own way of evaluating talent and how it would fit into what the coaches want. This notion that it's unique to Minnesota's staff is nonsense.

do stars / recruiting ranks matter? of course they do but it does not tell the whole story. can't remember the exact number but on ESPN they had the last 4 national champs average class ranking was in the top 5 and Ohio St's the lowest at 6.

Kill and his staff don't get many if any 4/5 star players not because they don't fit into what they are looking for it's because they can't. Gophers will never be able to recruit with the Ohio States of the world but to act like recruiting ranks mean nothing because your favorite team doesn't rank higher is ridiculous.
 


GopherWeatherGuy said:
Excellent article by FiveThirtyEight showing how teams fared compared to recruiting in 2014 and overall from 2005-2014. http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/after-signing-day-wisconsin-makes-the-best-of-its-recruits/

Top 3 overachievers: Wisconsin, Oregon, Missouri
Top 3 underachievers: Indiana, Illinois, Colorado

It appears that Minnesota was accidentally left off the list, but underachieved by 9.4 points, putting us in the middle of the underachievers. There's a footnote about it at the bottom.
Click to expand...

Weird. We overachieved last year (with Kill and a seemingly worse class) vs underachieved (badly with Brew and a good class). Who would've thunk it. Going back to 2005 isn't a real good strategy by fivethirtyeight this time. I know they're trying to boost statistical validity, but it actually doesn't account for the average tenure being closer to (I'm estimating) about 5 years.
 

beatles said:
Ok so you're saying right now that star rating is the only way to rank players? Because he apparently does which means yes, he doesn't get it.
Click to expand...

How else would you "rank" players. Is there a better way to rank them?
 

Killjoy said:
Does being ranked 46 or 48 compared to 50 or 52 mean anything? Not really.
Click to expand...

AMEN. I would go further... Not sure there is much of difference between 20 & 50 with all the unknowns. I find it funny how worked up folks get about star ratings, but it is hilarious when they get worked up over Michigan being ranked 2 spots higher than us. Illinois has their highest rated class in 4-years (6 spots above ours) and I wouldn't trade it for our class. I can't see a difference between NE, WI, IL, IN, or MN's class really and will trust Kill's judgement/analysis over any of those coaches.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

scools12 said:
all coaching staffs around the country have their own way of evaluating talent and how it would fit into what the coaches want. This notion that it's unique to Minnesota's staff is nonsense.

do stars / recruiting ranks matter? of course they do but it does not tell the whole story. can't remember the exact number but on ESPN they had the last 4 national champs average class ranking was in the top 5 and Ohio St's the lowest at 6.

Kill and his staff don't get many if any 4/5 star players not because they don't fit into what they are looking for it's because they can't. Gophers will never be able to recruit with the Ohio States of the world but to act like recruiting ranks mean nothing because your favorite team doesn't rank higher is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

I am done on this thread as I have not produced anything news worthy for the class of 2015 recruiting and typically frown upon debates in these threads from updates so I end with this: I understand that Kill's staff is working to get better players in this program and there is a lot of work to be done in that area though the trend is currently positive.

PS.... Tim Brewster was a GREAT recruiter..... WOOT WOOT
 

Spoofin said:
AMEN. I would go further... Not sure there is much of difference between 20 & 50 with all the unknowns. I find it funny how worked up folks get about star ratings, but it is hilarious when they get worked up over Michigan being ranked 2 spots higher than us. Illinois has their highest rated class in 4-years (6 spots above ours) and I wouldn't trade it for our class. I can't see a difference between NE, WI, IL, IN, or MN's class really and will trust Kill's judgement/analysis over any of those coaches.


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

Not surprising you would come to your conclusion but out of curiosity why can't you see a difference? Other than Kill coaches your favorite team.
 

All true

EliteOpinionGuy said:
You make absolutely NO sense with your typing (wish I could call it an argument but it just your stupidity via a keyboard) because you are unable to see what recruiting rankings are.... Since the sites who look to sell subscriptions to the public (you) and want to keep people coming in so they need to always have "new" rankings or "updated" info. Really all this is, is something to catch your attention and allow you to justify why you pay for the subscription in the first place.

But to get to the way Jerry Kill recruits (and has stated multiple times) they look for/evaluate players that the staff feels are specific body types and levels of athletism that can be coached while looking to find players that personally are fits for the U. This evaluation is completly irrelavent to the ESPNs and Rival.coms of the world because those are to sell subscriptions and Kills staff evaluates in order to KEEP THEIR JOB by getting the best players that fit what they want to do.

I cannot care any less whether or not personally you ever "get it" and are done with the complaining about how nationally we can't recruit because some expert says there are 50 classes better than us. But it is indicative to the level of comprehension you have since you can only validate how good you think the staff recruits is ONLY based on national rankings.... Not that the staff has been able to BEAT squads who supposedly out recruit them, but ONLY based on the national rank each year.
Click to expand...

I would completely agree that the recruiting sites rankings trend towards bias based on the amount of subscriptions they sell. Kill and staff seem to rely on established relationships with high schools and areas that they have traditionally recruited from even at the other places they have been. All coaches do this, but the Gophers are much more involved in recruiting areas like Kansas, Alabama, Lousiana, Maryland, and especially Illinois where they seem to have established relationships and trust people they have worked with in the past. These are recruiting foot prints that the Gophers never recruited from in the past, especially the Kansas Juco system. I would take the success of the last two season and Kill and his staff evaluations over the Tim Brewster Rivals star laden classes that led us to disastorous season like 3-9 in 2010. You can bitch and whine but the staff knows you win with players, ones that you can get in school, fit your system, and are coachable. They will always try and get as many good athletes and speed guys as they can from outside the state and try to get the Anchors in the O-line and D-line here. Personally I like the fact that they rely on their camps and in person evaluations, you can only see so many things on tape or film, the in person eye and looking another person in the eye gives you a feel for what they might be about.

We beat Nebraska and Iowa more regularly with this group than any we had before so they must be doing something on the recruiting side that makes sense. There has been measureable progress, and the trend is upwards so I'm happy with who they are recruiting so far. Last year was a big win, hopefully this year will be the same.
 


Don't want to get bogged down in the "Star" argument. I'll just say this. I believe that, for the Gophers to continue to show upward momentum, and put the team in a position where they are contending for conference titles, and playing in significant bowl games, the overall recruiting has to improve. They have to start hauling in a few higher-rated players, and not "settling" for lower-rated players in the final days before the deadline.

By next year, I would really like to see the Gopher recruiting class ranked no worst than 7th in the B1G, and in the top 40 nationally. I don't think that's too much to ask for.
 


beatles said:
There are absolutely times when a players star rating is affected based on his offers.
Click to expand...

If I found out Nick Saban offered a player that I had never heard of, it would certainly affect the way I perceive that player's abilities.

Not sure why this is so wrong. Believe it or not, human nature plays a factor in an objective business.

It doesn't change the fact that when you analyze a large sample size of recruiting rankings they absolutely have merit.
 

short ornery norwegian said:
Don't want to get bogged down in the "Star" argument. I'll just say this. I believe that, for the Gophers to continue to show upward momentum, and put the team in a position where they are contending for conference titles, and playing in significant bowl games, the overall recruiting has to improve. They have to start hauling in a few higher-rated players, and not "settling" for lower-rated players in the final days before the deadline.

By next year, I would really like to see the Gopher recruiting class ranked no worst than 7th in the B1G, and in the top 40 nationally. I don't think that's too much to ask for.
Click to expand...

The Gophers are going to be at a recruiting disadvantage until state of the art facilities are built. Compared to the rest of the B1G, we have the coaching, we are getting the buy in from the school and fanbase, but we don't have the facilities. Once that piece is in place, you should be able to attract top B1G talent to the school, or at least take a visit. Build the facilities and keep improving your record on the field. Then it all rests on the staff to be able to close and get those kids to sign.
 

Gopherdrummer said:
The Gophers are going to be at a recruiting disadvantage until state of the art facilities are built. Compared to the rest of the B1G, we have the coaching, we are getting the buy in from the school and fanbase, but we don't have the facilities. Once that piece is in place, you should be able to attract top B1G talent to the school, or at least take a visit. Build the facilities and keep improving your record on the field. Then it all rests on the staff to be able to close and get those kids to sign.
Click to expand...

Sounds about right.
 

scools12 said:
Not surprising you would come to your conclusion but out of curiosity why can't you see a difference? Other than Kill coaches your favorite team.
Click to expand...

Because 15 three stars and 10 two stars will get you a higher rating than 10 three stars and 15 two stars. However, this means almost nothing. What matters is how well they fit the system, how well they fit a team's needs, how well they can develop in a certain environment, if they can get in and stay in school, etc. Some random guy's evaluation of a player (or a handful of players) that doesn't include any of those things is irrelevant in the context of the overall recruiting team's impact. Note I didn't say our class was better, just that I don't see a difference to those others.

As for my Kill statement, that is based on what he has already shown at MN of his ability to identify 'under the radar' guys that didn't rank as high as some others. Not necessarily better athletes, but better players for MN (all that matters). Look no further than Tim Brewster for proof that highly rated/talented players can fail if not the right fit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

I'm too lazy to look it up but I would assume Nebraska has had higher rated classes than us the last 5 years or so. But after watching the past 2 years I have no doubt that the Gophers are more talented. It's not just coaching, we have better players than them. But according to the "experts" Nebraska is more talented because they have more stars.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom