Sagarin: 136th

Donate To GopherHole
Great Plains Gopher

Great Plains Gopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
6,444
Reaction score
989
Points
113
Not that ratings mean that much, but this is an insult. Apparently, the lowest ranking in over a decade, according to Fringe Bowl.
 

The team is about as bad as it has been in about a decade so the rating might not be far off.
 


How would this team do against the 2007 team? Who would win?
 

136 is a bit low, but it doesn't make much difference.
 




I don't know if I would have the stomach to watch the '07 team line up against the '10 team but I would be curious to hear who won. For what it is worth, I think the '10 team would win but it would be close. I think the offense ability is similar but the defense for the '10 team is a hair better.
 

This is why it is so hard to have a meaningful discussion about our team. It is so hard to evaluate one unit or one person when the collection as a whole is terrible.
 



monk10 said:
This is why it is so hard to have a meaningful discussion about our team. It is so hard to evaluate one unit or one person when the collection as a whole is terrible.
Click to expand...

How much is talent and how much is coaching? I think there is talent on this team that a better coach can exploit.
 


According to his site, the ratings are unbiased, meaning there have been enough games played to create statistical significance. His mathematical models are sound; that's about where the Gophers are.
 

Bad Gopher said:
According to his site, the ratings are unbiased, meaning there have been enough games played to create statistical significance. His mathematical models are sound; that's about where the Gophers are.
Click to expand...

Being unbiased doesn't necessarily mean the Gophers are the #136 team in the country.
 



Schnauzer said:
How would this team do against the 2007 team? Who would win?
Click to expand...

I am pretty certain it would resemble a vibrating metal field with plastic players running in circles unable to find a foam football.
 

It would resemble the 59-56 game where Wacker's team beat Purdue.
 

kellyleeks said:
I am pretty certain it would resemble a vibrating metal field with plastic players running in circles unable to find a foam football.
Click to expand...

tudor600%2B1962.jpg


I love playing with my Dad's as a kid. Better than HD...it was live and in front of you.

GM
 

RodentRampage said:
How much is talent and how much is coaching? I think there is talent on this team that a better coach can exploit.
Click to expand...

I don't know how to have a confident feeling about that. I haven't sat in a meeting room with these coaches to understand what they are trying to teach the kids to do. I can't look at a play, and say boy that kid is told the right thing, but he sure can't execute it (lack of talent), or the coach isn't even teaching him how to handle this block, formation etc etc (lack of coaching).

Before the season started my gut said it is coaching, but you have to look back and ask yourself are you being influenced by the propaganda that there is better talent now then when mason left. When I say talent I don't mean combine numbers, I mean football skill talent. However, how can we evaluate that when the kids haven't been in the same system for more then 2 years at one time.

Again another cop out, but I don't have a great way to evaluate that since some players look like better football talent under different systems. On a real basic level, an option qb is going to look a lot better at Air Force then under a efficient spread passing attack at NU.
 


I'm not saying this team has champion-level talent. Only that a better coach could get better results out of these players than Brewster has. To say otherwise is to say that Brewster is a good coach, but a bad recruiter. I know there are those who say that recruit rankings mean nothing. This isn't true. They certainly don't mean EVERYTHING, but there is a correlation between recruit rankings at the actual talent. Brewster hasn't put up the super recruiting classes that people hoped for, but they haven't been awful either. At the very least, this team's problems aren't just talent.
 

I'd break it down a bit more. There is football talent, there is development of that talent, there is game planing, and there is game calling, and there is game adjustments.

The football talent part falls down on the recruiting and the ability to identify talent. A lot of people think we are better here.
The development of talent: Here is where things get tricky. We have specific examples of people who were "terribad" that ended up getting NFL camp tryouts. You would have to think that the position coaches did something with that talent to get them a shot based on some individual workouts with teams.
The game planning: Here is where it starts to get a bit tricky. Did we have a good initial plan going into a game. At a high-level people look at how successful your first possessions on offense and defense to see if a coach had a good game plan based on the tapes of the other team.
The game calling: Here is where those critical calls happen. 4th and 1, onside kick, fake field goals, knowing to keep running the same play over and over again until they stop you, when to punt and pin them, when to call timeouts etc etc. I think a lot of people are frustrated with our staff to be able to accomplish this.
The game adjustments: I think most people have been relatively happy with this. The perception is that we are a pretty good second half team, but after loses to wisconsin having the lead I don't know if that perception is still true.
 

I think the adjustments have been awful. No adjustment against South Dakota, gave up 3 TD in the first half, and three more in the second half. The staff turnover and the making radical changes in philosophy have hurt the team. But this team could be a lot worse if the talent was truly awful.
 

monk10 said:
I don't know how to have a confident feeling about that. I haven't sat in a meeting room with these coaches to understand what they are trying to teach the kids to do. I can't look at a play, and say boy that kid is told the right thing, but he sure can't execute it (lack of talent), or the coach isn't even teaching him how to handle this block, formation etc etc (lack of coaching).

Before the season started my gut said it is coaching, but you have to look back and ask yourself are you being influenced by the propaganda that there is better talent now then when mason left. When I say talent I don't mean combine numbers, I mean football skill talent. However, how can we evaluate that when the kids haven't been in the same system for more then 2 years at one time.

Again another cop out, but I don't have a great way to evaluate that since some players look like better football talent under different systems. On a real basic level, an option qb is going to look a lot better at Air Force then under a efficient spread passing attack at NU.
Click to expand...

I think we all know a better coach would get more out of our team. I really don't think it would take a lot either considering how bad of a coach Brewster is.
 

CentralGopher said:
I think we all know a better coach would get more out of our team. I really don't think it would take a lot either considering how bad of a coach Brewster is.
Click to expand...

Pardon me, I'll revert back to lolcat pics and what not that is at your comfort level.
 

monk10 said:
Pardon me, I'll revert back to lolcat pics and what not that is at your comfort level.
Click to expand...

Even if your intended target isn't able to comprehend what you have to say, there is still some collateral damage effect on others on this board. Keep up the good thoughtful posts, stay away from the lolcat pics (for the most part).
 

Silvio said:
Even if your intended target isn't able to comprehend what you have to say, there is still some collateral damage effect on others on this board. Keep up the good thoughtful posts, stay away from the lolcat pics (for the most part).
Click to expand...

I'm actually the king of geeky internet pics on this board. :cry: And lolcat is my favorite source :D.
 

CentralGopher said:
Would you really want to watch that? What would you call that game? The ineptitude bowl?
Click to expand...

Well there's always the old standby, where you could call it the Toilet Bowl.

That, or the Repus Bowl, which is the polar opposite of a Super Bowl.
 

RodentRampage said:
I think the adjustments have been awful. No adjustment against South Dakota, gave up 3 TD in the first half, and three more in the second half. The staff turnover and the making radical changes in philosophy have hurt the team. But this team could be a lot worse if the talent was truly awful.
Click to expand...

No offense, but I dont know how they could me much worse...they lost to South Dakota at home.
 

gopherbadgerman said:
No offense, but I dont know how they could me much worse...they lost to South Dakota at home.
Click to expand...

They could be much, much worse. It wouldn't make a difference in the wins and losses though. The 1983 team was crushed by almost every team they played.
 

I think the 2007 version would beat this team because of coaching... specifically the coordinators. I like Horton, but I think that Dunbar was better, and I tend to think that Everett Withers would have done more with this amount of talent than Cosgrove has.
 

I think I'd take the '10 team over the '07 team. After all, they are just a few plays away from being undefeated.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom