Official 2022 Gophers Football Recruiting Thread: Links, Tweets, Videos, Rumors

Donate To GopherHole
hungan1 said:
Maybe it will change once Gopher OLs start getting drafted. Building a good program is a process. Building a great program is a long process.
Click to expand...
How long is long?
How long would you pay PJ to finish below 50%W in the conference?
How long before he wins the West?
 

Tommyboy said:
I could put together a competitive team with the majority being from Minnesota. No sh--, you have to recruit nationally. In the distant past kids would attend SJU instead of the University, because of their record, you have kids at NDSU that had offers with the gophers, TE from Crosby. I think you have more top end players from Minnesota on the Wisconsin team. The point is you have to get these kids to stay home and create a similar atmosphere in Minnesota. With the amount of Red Bull Fleck has drank and being a young coach, he should be getting players from all over.
Click to expand...
No. Let's see.........the last time the Gophers won the National Title they had Carl Eller at one defensive end, Bobby Bell on the other side, and Sandy Stephens at QB with other players from outside MN. If you want to win the National Title you have to go outside MN and compete with national-level talent. You don't get it.
 


Given that I’m 58; never was a highly recruited offensive lineman with dreams of playing in the NFL and born & bred a Gopher fan I have no standing to say the following: stay home & you have an incredible opportunity in your own back yard!
 

GopherDog1 said:
No. Let's see.........the last time the Gophers won the National Title they had Carl Eller at one defensive end, Bobby Bell on the other side, and Sandy Stephens at QB with other players from outside MN. If you want to win the National Title you have to go outside MN and compete with national-level talent. You don't get it.
Click to expand...
tenor.gif
We do also need as many of the local talent that we can get. Need instate Maroon and Gold bleeders as well.
 


Married@SiebertField said:
Given that I’m 58; never was a highly recruited offensive lineman with dreams of playing in the NFL and born & bred a Gopher fan I have no standing to say the following: stay home & you have an incredible opportunity in your own back yard!
Click to expand...
We the Fahnhorst brothers highly recruited? Hitchcock, Rasmussen? Olson (dad and Son's) Brian Williams (Maxx's dad)?
 

MNVCGUY said:
OL is so technique based in everything they do. Yes there is a talent component but if a kid has good size/agility and can master technique they can develop into a good/great offensive lineman. You can that unassuming under the radar kid who had a late growth spurt and make them into a player with the right coaching.

DL on the other hand requires a certain level of drive and aggressivness that is much easier to see in high school players and much harder to teach if it isn't there. You will find D-Lineman that develop and come out of nowhere but I would bet it is far less common than it is with offensive lineman.

That said, we may have an example of a developmental DL player becoming a star in Boye Mafe.
Click to expand...
That's as good a theory on it that I've heard.

-subscribe to theory-
 

Plato said:
How long is long?
How long would you pay PJ to finish below 50%W in the conference?
How long before he wins the West?
Click to expand...
Hopefully, we don't beat that day to the finish line. 🐸 "croak, croak, croak!"
 

A_Slab_of_Bacon said:
That's as good a theory on it that I've heard.

-subscribe to theory-
Click to expand...
Browning and Shaw were masters of taking the unheralded O-Line recruits and developing them into stars. Look at that 2002 class where Setterstrom and Eslinger were not highly regarded recruits but they were unbelievable players for us. The coaches knew what they were looking for in offensive lineman and it didn't really matter what they were ranked.
 




Tommyboy said:
On the most part the rating system is very biased and screwed. It like picking up a People's Magazine, just look where all the guys end up. Fleck like many coaches chase the stars, in reality you need coaches that can see talent. Purcell has never went to a football camp in his life, he has not been tested in HS, he was the lightest guy on his HS line this year. What he has is size, most P5 programs chase size, they believe they can build the guy to their specs. Look at Green, TE Ford-S. Two great athletes that did not get much playing time. Cody Lindenberg was not the best LB on his HS team, Anoka, his team won about 5 games in four years. Fleck had him starting last year. Kids in Minnesota on the most part do not buy in to the Gophers and Fleck will pick a few guys per year from the state and put his energy elsewhere. Wisconsin was the same way until they brought in the right coach a few decades ago and look at their program now. We all want our state programs to be great.
Click to expand...
I'm curious: who was the better linebacker on Anoka HS in 2019 season? Not saying Lindenberg was best, just asking you who was better (as a college prospect). Purcell might have been the lightest on his team's OL, but clearly he was the best. He was "light" in part, I suspect, because he was key player on his basketball team, too. Purcell was voted first team all-state; no other OL on his team were.
 
Last edited:

upnorthkid said:
while probably true, they aren't just selecting to stay home because they cannot live outside WI, it's because that system puts guys in the NFL in what I'd assume is a fun system for OL to play in (we're going to destroy the guys across from us, run for 250+ yards, and destroy their will)
Click to expand...
I think it's both, to some degree.

Granted, it's "easier" to be loyal to the home team, when they've had a nice stretch of winning.
 

Tommyboy said:
On the most part the rating system is very biased and screwed. It like picking up a People's Magazine, just look where all the guys end up. Fleck like many coaches chase the stars, in reality you need coaches that can see talent. Purcell has never went to a football camp in his life, he has not been tested in HS, he was the lightest guy on his HS line this year. What he has is size, most P5 programs chase size, they believe they can build the guy to their specs. Look at Green, TE Ford-S. Two great athletes that did not get much playing time. Cody Lindenberg was not the best LB on his HS team, Anoka, his team won about 5 games in four years. Fleck had him starting last year. Kids in Minnesota on the most part do not buy in to the Gophers and Fleck will pick a few guys per year from the state and put his energy elsewhere. Wisconsin was the same way until they brought in the right coach a few decades ago and look at their program now. We all want our state programs to be great.
Click to expand...
The thought you put into your posts is matched only by your command of the English language.
 




btowngopher said:
Iowa and Wisconsin just aren’t good at developing olinemen. They are two of the best in the nation and have been for years. Start putting olinemen in the nfl and the kids will stay. Just like how you don’t see Iowa and Wisconsin beating us for WR and QB recruits lately.
Click to expand...
The Gophers, after a long drought, will put several OL into the NFL, via the draft, after the 2021 and 2022 seasons. That should nullify the argument no doubt used by Iowa and Wisconsin recruiters that their programs put OL into the NFL but the Gophers' program doesn't. Still doesn't mean we get guys like Quinn Carroll (Notre Dame) or Lucas Heyer (Stanford), who might have selected a school with other considerations in mind. But it knocks down at least one of the obstacles to our keeping a few more top OL prospects at home.
 

Plato said:
How long is long?
How long would you pay PJ to finish below 50%W in the conference?
How long before he wins the West?
Click to expand...
There are folks in the "discontinuity" school who think that the best way to build up a program is to fire a coach, even a winning coach, every four or five years until you get a coach who quickly dominates across the board. The discontinuity theory is that you keep running coaches out of town every four or five years--even coaches that are winning and recruiting well--until, counterintuitively, the best coach/recruiter in the world decides to throw in with your school.

Many others, including myself, believe in the "continuity" theory. This posits that building a program up to a new level takes time, because all of your very capable competitors are attempting to build up their top-flight programs at the very same time. It is very hard work to build up at a meaningly faster pace than your top-flight competitors. Building up a program to a top level when that program has gradually, over 40 years, sunk into a non-relevant state, can't happen overnight, especially if the program, the school and its location, and the school's boosters, have no extra-special recruiting inducements to offer.

In the "continuity" theory, you get a coach who is very invested in the school and the program, a coach who embraces the task of recruiting, a coach who is a long-term winner. You judge that coach by whether he is making reasonable progress toward a series of reasonable goals, understanding that there can be some unusual ups and downs over the years--almost nothing moves in a perfectly straight trend line. Those goals can be recruiting results, winning record, keeping pace with rapidly advancing competitors, student academic achievement, student community involvement, student behavior, etc. If reasonable progress is being made, why would a rational person jettison a favorable multi-year effort and a positive trend line only to start from scratch all over again?

If reasonable progress isn't being made against a reasonable series of goals, then it is just fine to want a fresh start.

To my thinking, PJ has made and is making ABOVE reasonable progress on a series of reasonable goals for the Gophers' program, and I wouldn't want to start from scratch with a new guy, new coaches and dozens of top players transferring out.

Perhaps you (Plato) prefer absolute performance "deadlines" rather than reasonable annual progress toward a broader sweep of goals. That's fine. This is all just opinion. Nebraska has used your approach, throwing out winning football coaches every four or five years because certain absolute performance deadlines weren't met. Their new savior, who is now on the clock, is Scott Frost. Nebraska might be starting from scratch again soon.
 
Last edited:

Plato said:
How long is long?
How long would you pay PJ to finish below 50%W in the conference?
How long before he wins the West?
Click to expand...
Your boy Barry Alvarez finished below .500 in the Big Ten in 5 of his first 7 seasons and had just one great season in that mix. To Wisconsin's credit they stuck with him and it worked out big time as he was able to lay a foundation of success that the program has been able to maintain.
 

This was alluded to in a couple of posts.

Although the Gophers have had some success under Fleck, especially in 2019, for a lot of people IN MN and more people outside of MN, the perception of the Gopher program is "average to below-average."

Under Mason, the Gophers got attention for a strong running game, but also for blowing leads and losing games in gut-wrenching fashion.

Brewster was Brewster.

Under Kill and Claeys, the Gophers got a little respectability back, but they were still not seen as an upper-level program.

One good season is not going to change those perceptions, especially at the national level. The Gophers need to put 2, 3, or 4 really solid seasons in a row, preferably while winning a conference title or at least playing in the conference championship game.

2020 with covid and players opting out cost the program a lot of momentum. 2021 needs to be a big bounce-back season if the Gophers want recruits to look at the program in a different light.
 

Gophergrandpa said:
There are folks in the "discontinuity" school who think that the best way to build up a program is to fire a coach, even a winning coach, every four or five years until you get a coach who quickly dominates across the board. The discontinuity theory is that you keep running coaches out of town every four or five years--even coaches that are winning and recruiting well--until, counterintuitively, the best coach/recruiter in the world decides to throw in with your school. Many others, including myself, believe in the "continuity" theory. This posits that building a program up to a new level takes time, because all of your very capable competitors are attempting to build up their top-flight programs at the very same time. It is very hard work to build up at a meaningly faster pace than your top-flight competitors. Building up a program to a top level when that program has gradually, over 40 years, sunk into a non-relevant state, can't happen overnight, especially if the program, the school and its location, and the school's boosters, have no extra-special recruiting inducements to offer. In the "continuity" theory, you get a coach who is very invested in the school and the program, a coach who embraces the task of recruiting, a coach who is a long-term winner. You judge that coach by whether he is making reasonable progress toward a series of reasonable goals, understanding that there can be some unusual ups and downs over the years--almost nothing moves in a perfectly straight trend line. Those goals can be recruiting results, winning record, keeping pace with rapidly advancing competitors, student academic achievement, student community involvement, student behavior, etc. If reasonable progress is being made, why would a rational person jettison a favorable multi-year effort and a positive trend line only to start from scratch all over again? If reasonable progress isn't being made against a reasonable series of goals, then it is just fine to want a fresh start. To my thinking, PJ has made and is making ABOVE reasonable progress on a series of reasonable goals for the Gophers' program, and I wouldn't want to start from scratch with a new guy, new coaches and dozens of top players transferring out. Perhaps you prefer absolute performance "deadlines" rather than reasonable annual progress toward a broader sweep of goals. That's fine. This is all just opinion. Nebraska has used your approach, throwing out winning football coaches every four or five years because certain absolute performance deadlines weren't met. Their new savior, who is now on the clock, is Scott Frost. Nebraska could be starting from scratch again soon.
Click to expand...
Difficult read. Can you use paragraphs in the future?
 


#2Gopher said:
Difficult read. Can you use paragraphs in the future?
Click to expand...
I gave my long post some paragraph breaks. Take another look.

Problem is that my post is too long for a site such as this, which doesn’t present long-winded text in a very easy to read manner. Other problem is that I am too long-winded!
 
Last edited:



Gophergrandpa said:
There are folks in the "discontinuity" school who think that the best way to build up a program is to fire a coach, even a winning coach, every four or five years until you get a coach who quickly dominates across the board. The discontinuity theory is that you keep running coaches out of town every four or five years--even coaches that are winning and recruiting well--until, counterintuitively, the best coach/recruiter in the world decides to throw in with your school.

Many others, including myself, believe in the "continuity" theory. This posits that building a program up to a new level takes time, because all of your very capable competitors are attempting to build up their top-flight programs at the very same time. It is very hard work to build up at a meaningly faster pace than your top-flight competitors. Building up a program to a top level when that program has gradually, over 40 years, sunk into a non-relevant state, can't happen overnight, especially if the program, the school and its location, and the school's boosters, have no extra-special recruiting inducements to offer.

In the "continuity" theory, you get a coach who is very invested in the school and the program, a coach who embraces the task of recruiting, a coach who is a long-term winner. You judge that coach by whether he is making reasonable progress toward a series of reasonable goals, understanding that there can be some unusual ups and downs over the years--almost nothing moves in a perfectly straight trend line. Those goals can be recruiting results, winning record, keeping pace with rapidly advancing competitors, student academic achievement, student community involvement, student behavior, etc. If reasonable progress is being made, why would a rational person jettison a favorable multi-year effort and a positive trend line only to start from scratch all over again?

If reasonable progress isn't being made against a reasonable series of goals, then it is just fine to want a fresh start.

To my thinking, PJ has made and is making ABOVE reasonable progress on a series of reasonable goals for the Gophers' program, and I wouldn't want to start from scratch with a new guy, new coaches and dozens of top players transferring out.

Perhaps you (Plato) prefer absolute performance "deadlines" rather than reasonable annual progress toward a broader sweep of goals. That's fine. This is all just opinion. Nebraska has used your approach, throwing out winning football coaches every four or five years because certain absolute performance deadlines weren't met. Their new savior, who is now on the clock, is Scott Frost. Nebraska might be starting from scratch again soon.
Click to expand...
Anybody have the TLDR version of this?
 


Again and again, it is the product PJ fields and the conference W/L record that is significant.
Not where the players came from or what their rankings were.
 


#2Gopher said:
Curious. Is an education at Hill Murray much better than at Stillwater where he from?
Click to expand...
There's the Catholic angle, though. No idea how much, if at all, that played into it for their grade school choices.
 

Gophergrandpa said:
I gave my long post some paragraph breaks. Take another look.

Problem is that my post is too long for a site such as this, which doesn’t present long-winded text in a very easy to read manner. Other problem is that I am too long-winded!
Click to expand...
Much better.
 

MNVCGUY said:
Your boy Barry Alvarez finished below .500 in the Big Ten in 5 of his first 7 seasons and had just one great season in that mix. To Wisconsin's credit they stuck with him and it worked out big time as he was able to lay a foundation of success that the program has been able to maintain.
Click to expand...
True but let us see that the one great season was in season 4 and was a tie for the conference and a Rose Bowl title. That would buy a decade there or here.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom