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

Donate To GopherHole
Holy Crap! Every year for as long as I can remember, after every signing period we have this same argument, just different people. Stars vs Coaching, Coaching vs Stars, this ranked class vs that ranked class. Be happy, Kill is a damn fine coach who has done very well finding very good players who don't have FLASH and 60 stars next to them. Give it time, our classes are getting better and better, and it has shown every year since Kill has been here on the field of play.

I'm more focused on who Kill is still trying to recruit on the O-Line
 

Stars do matter to an extent. Programs like Minnesota,Wisconsin,Bosie st, Iowa etc are developmental programs. For example kids from the Milwaukee area and particularly from the inner city dont go to combines or Rivals.com,Scout.com or Under Armor events in the summer. So the websites dont know who they are and they dont get ranked. Why dont they go to these events? because they dont have the means or resources. In the Midwest you also have more multi-sport athletes so young men are playing AAU basketball in the summer or like in JJ Watts case he was a serious high school hockey player who attended hockey camps in the summer. Combines and 7v7 events are all over in warm weather states practically yr round so the kids have maximum exposure. The University of Wisconsin currently has 39 players on active NFL rosters second only to Alabama and Wisconsin never finishes in the top 20 in recruiting. Jerry Kill understands this, would he like 4 star recruits? sure & they may come at some point but until then he will take under evaluated 2-3 star guys and win a bunch of games with them & put them in the NFL. Minnesota is a developmental program so just trust the staff and embrace the process.
 


Spoofin said:
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
Click to expand...

I am not on the side of rankings tell all but at this point they are pretty much all we have to compare classes. I put more stock in them right or wrong against what a fan base wants to believe about a recruiting class.
 

Every year I go back and look at our recruiting classes to see who actually panned out and who didn't and every year its the same story...our less-regarded signees turn out to be some of out top players, ie; Maxx Williams, Eric Murray, Greg Eslinger, etc. Many times our top recruits turn out to be disappointing such as Andre McDonald, Marquis Gray, Jamel Harbison, etc. Yes, they failed for various reasons and not necessarily football related ones but the point remains. I'm not a huge believer in the star-system. All that rates is physical potential, not character or even more important, a players drive to succeed. Its fun to land top recruits, but I'd rather have top players and people. Get enough of them and top recruits will come to us and maybe someday we'll be able to pick and choose.
 


UncleSam'sMisguidedChild said:
Every year I go back and look at our recruiting classes to see who actually panned out and who didn't and every year its the same story...our less-regarded signees turn out to be some of out top players, ie; Maxx Williams, Eric Murray, Greg Eslinger, etc. Many times our top recruits turn out to be disappointing such as Andre McDonald, Marquis Gray, Jamel Harbison, etc. Yes, they failed for various reasons and not necessarily football related ones but the point remains. I'm not a huge believer in the star-system. All that rates is physical potential, not character or even more important, a players drive to succeed. Its fun to land top recruits, but I'd rather have top players and people. Get enough of them and top recruits will come to us and maybe someday we'll be able to pick and choose.
Click to expand...

Marquis [sic] Gray was "disappointing" and a "failure"?
 


This is what makes this board frustrating. A person will make a point and someone else comes along and nit-picks one tiny part out of the larger issue. Gimmie a break. Compared to the hype he came with, yes Gray was a disappointment. He proved to be a better WR than QB. I know injuries slowed him down, too. Point being, I'm almost always more excited to see what the guys at the bottom of our class have to offer because often times they turn out to be the real players.
 




UncleSam'sMisguidedChild said:
This is what makes this board frustrating. A person will make a point and someone else comes along and nit-picks one tiny part out of the larger issue. Gimmie a break. Compared to the hype he came with, yes Gray was a disappointment. He proved to be a better WR than QB. I know injuries slowed him down, too. Point being, I'm almost always more excited to see what the guys at the bottom of our class have to offer because often times they turn out to be the real players.
Click to expand...

Calling someone a 'failure' isn't really nitpicking when it is a completely ridiculous statement. Especially, when you put Marquies in the same sentence as a guy who was kicked off the team and another guy who trasnferred out.
 

beatles said:
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.
Click to expand...

According to the NFL Nebraska is more talented as well.
 


UncleSam'sMisguidedChild said:
This is what makes this board frustrating. A person will make a point and someone else comes along and nit-picks one tiny part out of the larger issue. Gimmie a break. Compared to the hype he came with, yes Gray was a disappointment. He proved to be a better WR than QB. I know injuries slowed him down, too. Point being, I'm almost always more excited to see what the guys at the bottom of our class have to offer because often times they turn out to be the real players.
Click to expand...

Hines Ward was a better WR than QB. Failure! Disappointment!

Antwaan Randle El was a better WR than QB. Failure! Disappointment!

Matt Jones was a better WR than QB. Failure! Disappointment!
 



e.bigelow said:
Calling someone a 'failure' isn't really nitpicking when it is a completely ridiculous statement. Especially, when you put Marquies in the same sentence as a guy who was kicked off the team and another guy who trasnferred out.
Click to expand...

+1000000000000


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 


He failed to live up to the hype, not succeed as a football player eventually. He was/is a tremendous athelete which is why he plays football professionally. Oh, and if you guys are going to quote somebody, make sure they actually said what you think they said. I never used the word failure. I used failed, and I was referencing to hype, not whether or not they made it to the NFL.
 

Today I learned that somebody who failed is not a failure. I guess you learn something new on this board every day.
 

dpodoll68 said:
If you had ridiculous, unrealistic standards - sure.
Click to expand...

It was ridiculous and unrealistic to think that a 4 star highly rated QB would one day be a very good QB for us? There's no way you can make an argument that Gray's career went the way you wanted, hoped, or expected. Did he even get honorable mention a single season? I mean you just have to be contrarian about everything on here regardless of the subject. It's strange.
 

Look, I was referring to his hype. His potential. Experts (and Tim Brewster) talked him up to be a Heisman contender. Whatever. I'm obviously outnumbered here. Bad example maybe. But please tell me you understand the real point I was trying to make.
 

UncleSam'sMisguidedChild said:
Look, I was referring to his hype. His potential. Experts (and Tim Brewster) talked him up to be a Heisman contender. Whatever. I'm obviously outnumbered here. Bad example maybe. But please tell me you understand the real point I was trying to make.
Click to expand...

Whether I understood it isn't the issue. I understood it perfectly. That doesn't make it a good or valid point.
 

MGray single handily beat Iowa. He did everything this University asked of him and was failed by the U more than he failed us.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

beatles said:
It was ridiculous and unrealistic to think that a 4 star highly rated QB would one day be a very good QB for us? There's no way you can make an argument that Gray's career went the way you wanted, hoped, or expected. Did he even get honorable mention a single season? I mean you just have to be contrarian about everything on here regardless of the subject. It's strange.
Click to expand...

maybe you might re-examine your infatuation with the star ranking system, then?
 

UncleSam'sMisguidedChild said:
He failed to live up to the hype, not succeed as a football player eventually. He was/is a tremendous athelete which is why he plays football professionally. Oh, and if you guys are going to quote somebody, make sure they actually said what you think they said. I never used the word failure. I used failed, and I was referencing to hype, not whether or not they made it to the NFL.
Click to expand...

I guess I get a little offended when someone refers to someone "failing/failed/failure" whatever tense or way you want to put it, when the player did everything he possibly could to contribute to the program in any way he could (and was asked to by the coaching staff no less, then didn't pout/transfer/complain) and was a great representative of the University.

I also don't agree he "failed to live up to the hype" as he was a solid contributor for four years playing two different positions and now is in the NFL.
 

There is nobody competing for the big10 consistently who recruits 50+ ranked classes every year. It has to improve if the gophers are going to be consistent contenders. Sure you might find a couple diamonds, league might be down, might find that stud qb that can lead you, but it won't be a regular thing.
 

Agree 100% with Spoofs and EBigs.

Don’t forget that Brewster misused him the first year by burning his redshirt and never really playing him. Throw in the injury and the QB/wide receiver thing and the poor guy just never had a chance to gain traction. Although he could have bitched like so many others, he was a class act through and through. A true "U" Man!
 

I think, perhaps, there are two sides to this coin. Sometimes posters could choose their words more carefully and often-times those that reply need to take a deep breath and relax. I think we all get a bit touchy when there's not much to talk about.

That being said...certainly most of us realize that a player's star rating as a 16 or 17-year-old kid isn't always an accurate predictor of how productive that player will become as a young man. However, I see no harm or fault in hoping for some of the 4 and 5 stars guys to sign up for our squad. 5 stars doesn't guarantee stardom, but I like their chances a bit more.

For now, I'm happy we have a coaching staff that has proven capable of developing talent. Imagining what our staff could do with consensus 4 and 5 star guys gets me really fired up. Hopefully those days are coming soon. Perhaps JoJo will be the domino! (If he is, can we nickname him Domino? I'm on a nickname kick right now after WD40.)
 

So you were just looking for a fight. Get over yourself bud. Don't sweat the petty stuff. If I'm wrong about Gray, I'm wrong. Oh well, I can handle it. But no one made you the only judge. Focus was meant to be on the larger issue of this years class.
 

btowngopher said:
There is nobody competing for the big10 consistently who recruits 50+ ranked classes.
Click to expand...

Wisconsin

Rivals overall team rankings

2009: 43
2010: 88
2011: 40
2012: 57
2013: 57

Average rating: 57

Wisconsin has finished 1st or 2nd in the division/conference every year but one since 2010.
 

dpodoll68 said:
Wisconsin

Rivals overall team rankings

2009: 43
2010: 88
2011: 40
2012: 57
2013: 57

Average rating: 57

Wisconsin has finished 1st or 2nd in the division/conference every year but one since 2010.
Click to expand...

Are you saying you'd rather be in the 50's than the 20's? (Trying to understand your point.)
 

go_gophers said:
Are you saying you'd rather be in the 50's than the 20's? (Trying to understand your point.)
Click to expand...

He is refuting part of the quote below in the which the poster stated that no one is competing for the B1G Ten (championship, implied) with 50+ recruiting classes, when in fact, Wisconsin does that consistently.

btowngopher said:
There is nobody competing for the big10 consistently who recruits 50+ ranked classes every year. It has to improve if the gophers are going to be consistent contenders. Sure you might find a couple diamonds, league might be down, might find that stud qb that can lead you, but it won't be a regular thing.
Click to expand...
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom