the more likely scenario in 2010??

Donate To GopherHole
D

dinkything

Active member
Joined
Jan 9, 2009
Messages
579
Reaction score
34
Points
28
which is the more likely scenario in 2010?

bcs caliber bowl:D

or

top 3 big 10 finish, and a new year's day bowl:)

or

4th place big 10 finish in the big 10 and down to san antonio for the alamo bowl:cool:

or

repeat of 2008 with bowl elegibility, and a minor bowl televised on a cable channel that no one gets :(

or

losing season, with an early-season a$$ whoopin' from southern cal, and home for the holidays :mad:

it has been a good week with a solid batch of recruits who've faxed in their loi's to dinkytown, although i must say (and i do not mean to be negative here) that it seems like a mason-esqe caliber recruiting class coming in...

realistically, if brewster leads the maroon and gold to san antonio during the next two seasons, then i will consider joel maturi's coaching change of two years ago to be a success.

anything more than san antonio will be considered a smashing success...

if the team struggles to achieve bowl elegibility...or worse...nahhhh, i don't want to even go there...
 

Not even remotely Masonesque

I think you're misremembering the type of recruiting class that Mason used to get. I don't have all the numbers here, but there are 3-5 4* recruits in this class (depending on rating site) and I believe Mason got about that many 4* guys in 10 years. Also, there are only two 2* recruits and one of those is a Punter (who just about never get higher than that). Mason's classes were generally featured numerous 2* guys.

I won't go deeper than that as there are other threads that have done lots of good analysis. Suffice it to say that this class, though not featuring as many 4*s as last year, is much deeper and there's more overall talent top-to-bottom.

On top of that, we will have the services of Maresh (4*), Royston (3*), Carufel (4*), Gray (4*) and Cooper (4*) adding more talent to the squad. The influx of talent is very exciting!
 

I try to look at things objectively and discuss rationally. The schedule that year is rough, especially with USC. I will freely admit, I do look at the Gophers through Maroon and Gold glasses :) So, I hope that our coordinators do a great job and the kids really develop quickly. I vote for top 3 in in BT and New Years Day Bowl! If everyone progresses and Brew bring in another solid class next year, I don't think it is unreasonable to believe.
 

BBShopGo4 said:
I think you're misremembering the type of recruiting class that Mason used to get. I don't have all the numbers here, but there are 3-5 4* recruits in this class (depending on rating site) and I believe Mason got about that many 4* guys in 10 years. Also, there are only two 2* recruits and one of those is a Punter (who just about never get higher than that). Mason's classes were generally featured numerous 2* guys.

I won't go deeper than that as there are other threads that have done lots of good analysis. Suffice it to say that this class, though not featuring as many 4*s as last year, is much deeper and there's more overall talent top-to-bottom.

On top of that, we will have the services of Maresh (4*), Royston (3*), Carufel (4*), Gray (4*) and Cooper (4*) adding more talent to the squad. The influx of talent is very exciting!
Click to expand...


not sure you've noticed...or maybe you are just a 'youngster'...but there has been some inflation in recent years with regard to the way stars are dished out...

it's funny, but there are no more 1-star ron johnson's and greg eslinger's to be found:confused::confused:
when was the last time anyone was rated a 1-star?

on the other hand, a guy like michael carter's classmate from pompano beach ely, eric jacques, is a 3-star, even though he received his only d-1a offer (not meant as a slam on eric) the weekend before nloi signing day:eek:

five or ten years ago, jacques would have been a 1-star, and mason would have been criticized for 'wasting' a scholarship on him :rolleyes:

don't be misled by the inflationary rating nonsense going on...
 

dinkything said:
which is the more likely scenario in 2010?

bcs caliber bowl:D

or

top 3 big 10 finish, and a new year's day bowl:)

or

4th place big 10 finish in the big 10 and down to san antonio for the alamo bowl:cool:

or

repeat of 2008 with bowl elegibility, and a minor bowl televised on a cable channel that no one gets :(

or

losing season, with an early-season a$$ whoopin' from southern cal, and home for the holidays :mad:

it has been a good week with a solid batch of recruits who've faxed in their loi's to dinkytown, although i must say (and i do not mean to be negative here) that it seems like a mason-esqe caliber recruiting class coming in...

realistically, if brewster leads the maroon and gold to san antonio during the next two seasons, then i will consider joel maturi's coaching change of two years ago to be a success.

anything more than san antonio will be considered a smashing success...

if the team struggles to achieve bowl elegibility...or worse...nahhhh, i don't want to even go there...
Click to expand...

"REASONABLY"...I'd go with the Alamo Bowl and 4th place finish. I don't think people realize how hard it will be to crack that top 3. It will be VERY difficult.
 


dinkything said:
not sure you've noticed...or maybe you are just a 'youngster'...but there has been some inflation in recent years with regard to the way stars are dished out...

it's funny, but there are no more 1-star ron johnson's and greg eslinger's to be found:confused::confused:
when was the last time anyone was rated a 1-star?

on the other hand, a guy like michael carter's classmate from pompano beach ely, eric jacques, is a 3-star, even though he received his only d-1a offer (not meant as a slam on eric) the weekend before nloi signing day:eek:

five or ten years ago, jacques would have been a 1-star, and mason would have been criticized for 'wasting' a scholarship on him :rolleyes:

don't be misled by the inflationary rating nonsense going on...
Click to expand...

While I don't entirely disagree with the inflated star ratings over the past few years, I would very much so disagree with your 1-star analogy. Rivals has never rated anyone a 1-star to my knowledge. Scout gives a 1-star rating as a placeholder if they haven't evaluated the recruit while Rivals gives no stars.
An argument could also be made that the standards for evaluating players have stayed the same and that high school football athletes have gotten better over the past decade. No doubt training facilities and technology have helped whip players into shape better than they did 10 years ago. I tend to think it's a little of both inflated ratings and better athletes.
In any case, the inflated ratings would slowly take effect over a few years, but MN recruiting made a very sudden shift towards the higher ratings last year and continued this year.
 

Our goal for 2010 should definately be top 3 and a New Year's Day bowl. I think the schedule is favorable compared to 2009. With the rise of Mich State and the inevitable return of Michigan, 2010 will be a tough year in the Big Ten so I don't really know what to expect.
 

dinkything said:
not sure you've noticed...or maybe you are just a 'youngster'...but there has been some inflation in recent years with regard to the way stars are dished out...

it's funny, but there are no more 1-star ron johnson's and greg eslinger's to be found:confused::confused:
when was the last time anyone was rated a 1-star?

on the other hand, a guy like michael carter's classmate from pompano beach ely, eric jacques, is a 3-star, even though he received his only d-1a offer (not meant as a slam on eric) the weekend before nloi signing day:eek:

five or ten years ago, jacques would have been a 1-star, and mason would have been criticized for 'wasting' a scholarship on him :rolleyes:

don't be misled by the inflationary rating nonsense going on...
Click to expand...

Well if you're saying more players are given a higher rating now than before, I'm guessing it would be that way across the board then. Rankings aren't exact but they do show that there is no doubt our recruiting classes have improved if compared to the rest of the nation. Rankings back to 2002:

2002 - 55th (28 recruits)
2003 - 37th (26) Maroney, Wheelwright, Paris Hamilton all rated high
2004 - 58th (24)
2005 - 55th (18)
2006 - 62nd (21)
2007 - 57th (24)
2008 - 17th (30)
2009 - 39th (20)

Most of Mason's classes were ranked 55th or worse so saying this year's class was "mason-esqe" is not accurate. You can say you're disapointed with this class but it is better than most of Mason's.
 

16FeetUnder said:
While I don't entirely disagree with the inflated star ratings over the past few years, I would very much so disagree with your 1-star analogy. Rivals has never rated anyone a 1-star to my knowledge. Scout gives a 1-star rating as a placeholder if they haven't evaluated the recruit while Rivals gives no stars.
An argument could also be made that the standards for evaluating players have stayed the same and that high school football athletes have gotten better over the past decade. No doubt training facilities and technology have helped whip players into shape better than they did 10 years ago. I tend to think it's a little of both inflated ratings and better athletes.
In any case, the inflated ratings would slowly take effect over a few years, but MN recruiting made a very sudden shift towards the higher ratings last year and continued this year.
Click to expand...

It is not my opinion that ron johnson was a 1-star recruit out of detroit....but that was before the 'star inflation' :D


from 16 feet under:
Our goal for 2010 should definately be top 3 and a New Year's Day bowl. I think the schedule is favorable compared to 2009. With the rise of Mich State and the inevitable return of Michigan, 2010 will be a tough year in the Big Ten so I don't really know what to expect.

fyi...Michigan is not on Minnesota's 2010 schedule....
 



GophersInIowa said:
Well if you're saying more players are given a higher rating now than before, I'm guessing it would be that way across the board then. Rankings aren't exact but they do show that there is no doubt our recruiting classes have improved if compared to the rest of the nation. Rankings back to 2002:

2002 - 55th (28 recruits)
2003 - 37th (26) Maroney, Wheelwright, Paris Hamilton all rated high
2004 - 58th (24)
2005 - 55th (18)
2006 - 62nd (21)
2007 - 57th (24)
2008 - 17th (30)
2009 - 39th (20)

Most of Mason's classes were ranked 55th or worse so saying this year's class was "mason-esqe" is not accurate. You can say you're disapointed with this class but it is better than most of Mason's.
Click to expand...

actually, the 2008 ranking was based on receiving 31 loi's, which is 10% more than mason's highest number of loi's received...and as we all know, rankings are a function of both quantity and quality...
additionally, iirc, the 2008 ranking of 17th was revised downward (to 35th?) once the student-athletes reported--or didn't report--in august...
 

dinkything said:
actually, the 2008 ranking was based on receiving 31 loi's, which is 10% more than mason's highest number of loi's received...and as we all know, rankings are a function of both quantity and quality...
additionally, iirc, the 2008 ranking of 17th was revised downward (to 35th?) once the student-athletes reported--or didn't report--in august...
Click to expand...

Actually, 30 is the correct number. It not really reasonable to compare adjusted rankings with non-adjusted rankings. For example, one of Mason's star recruits in '06 was Robert McField. As a matter of fact, the top four guys that year (all 5.6 three stars according to Rivals) were: Robert McField, Jamar Howard, Sean McWhirter, and Terrence Sherrer.

Also, if I'm not mistaken, Rivals only uses the top 22 for its calculations.
 

harrys ghost said:
Actually, 30 is the correct number. It not really reasonable to compare adjusted rankings with non-adjusted rankings. For example, one of Mason's star recruits in '06 was Robert McField. As a matter of fact, the top four guys that year (all 5.6 three stars according to Rivals) were: Robert McField, Jamar Howard, Sean McWhirter, and Terrence Sherrer.

Also, if I'm not mistaken, Rivals only uses the top 22 for its calculations.
Click to expand...

harry,
if you don't count 4-star dt mcgee from mississippi juco, then you are down to 30...
mcgee's faxed loi was received at bierman, though, along with hill's, gayden's, and all the others...
 

dinkything said:
harry,
if you don't count 4-star dt mcgee from mississippi juco, then you are down to 30...
mcgee's faxed loi was received at bierman, though, along with hill's, gayden's, and all the others...
Click to expand...

Check it out on Rivals. They actually show 29. Rivals no longer shows McGhee. Not sure what's up with that. I do not believe Grayden ever signed.
 



You're right in that rivals only count the top 22 (23?). So Dinky's point is invalid.
 

dinkything said:
fyi...Michigan is not on Minnesota's 2010 schedule....
Click to expand...

But they do play in the Big Ten which could affect our overall rank in the conference, which is the point of this thread. If they were good, they could easily bump us out of the top 3 in the conference regardless of any head to head competition.
 

harrys ghost said:
Actually, 30 is the correct number. It not really reasonable to compare adjusted rankings with non-adjusted rankings. For example, one of Mason's star recruits in '06 was Robert McField. As a matter of fact, the top four guys that year (all 5.6 three stars according to Rivals) were: Robert McField, Jamar Howard, Sean McWhirter, and Terrence Sherrer.

Also, if I'm not mistaken, Rivals only uses the top 22 for its calculations.
Click to expand...

They actually only use the top 20.
 

Dinky, it's true that last year's class ranking...

dinkything said:
actually, the 2008 ranking was based on receiving 31 loi's, which is 10% more than mason's highest number of loi's received...and as we all know, rankings are a function of both quantity and quality...
additionally, iirc, the 2008 ranking of 17th was revised downward (to 35th?) once the student-athletes reported--or didn't report--in august...
Click to expand...

...went down due to student-athletes who didn't make the grade (literally) last fall. That said, you must use that same logic to count Gray (4*), Carufel (4*), Maresh (4*), Royston (3*) and Reeves (3*) towards the final class ranking for 2009 - ergo, 2009 ranking should actually be higher than 39.

I'm puzzled as to why some posters (not necessarily you, DT) are (pick one: complaining about; bemoaning; belittling; unsatisfied with) this class. These five young men who also should be added to the 2009 recruiting class (Carufel and Royston especially, given they've already been tested at the college level at ND and Wisconsin, respectively) in my view are going to make significant contributions this fall.

Lastly, props to Coach Brew for holding scholarships for Maresh, Gray, and Reeves (particularly Gray and Reeves). He could have hung the latter two out to dry, but decided to give them a chance to qualify. That took a lot of character. Good for Brew, the staff, and the kids.
 

I'll be honest, I didn't expect anyone looking ahead to 2010 already. It's so far out there I don't know what to think. We haven't seen anyone in the 2009 class play yet which handicaps an accurate prediction. When you look at the recruits on paper (Height, Weight, 40-times, bench, etc) they look better than the caliber of player that we brought in a few years ago. However, they still need to continue to develop and recruiting ratings are just an educated forecast about the future.

Looking ahead to 2010: We lose 2-3 starters from the secondary (Simmons, Sherels, Brock?), 2 LB's (Campbell, Lawrence), and likely 3-4 DL (Brown, Small, McKinley? Onwauchi?) which means we lose 7-10 starters from the D. To totally guess on the future our 2010 secondary will be Royston & Theret/Dandridge/Watkins at Safety and Carter, Lewis and a new Juco CB or Stoudermire/Collado as the CB's that see the field. At LB we will have Maresh, Cooper and Reeves with Tinsley, Rallis, Singleton, Grant, Zagzebski, and other 2010 recruits competing in the 2 deep. Our DL will include Jacobs, Edwards, Kirkesy and Garin/Gregory-McGhee or Juco additions. We basically don't have a 2007 class (the coaching transition year) so we're going to be relying on juniors and sophomores on the defensive side of the ball. I love our recruiting classes the last two years but I'd like to see them hit the field before predicting a bowl game two years away.

The offense is a little easier to guess because the only seniors on that side of the ball this year will be Decker (big loss but we should have good WR depth), Tow-Arnett (good TE depth) and possibly a couple starters from the line which we should be able to replace.

Of course, there is no guarantee that all of the players I mentioned are still here in 2010. I'd like to think this is about as educated of a 2010 discussion your going to find here but I'm not crazy enough to make any prediction. Between 2010 & 2011 I think we will be very good but my guess is we are better in 2011 (2008 class is Sr/RS Jr and 2009 class is Jr/RS So) than 2010 because the 2007 class that are seniors in 2010 are not as good as 2008 or 2009 classes.
 

Grunk, great analysis, well thought out, especially when compared to the shallow thinking displayed in the post that started this thread (that was an absurd argument). A few months back I made an analysis based on number of players with 5.7 rankings or better, showing that we (at the time) over the last two seasons are between 3rd and 6th place in recruiting in the Big Ten (OSU/Mich 1/2, Ill, PSU, and Mich St. other in 3-6). I'll have to revise my analysis soon, chances are we'll fall only slightly because we have only gotten a couple more 5.7 or better players since. That said, to say that this class is on a Mason-esque level shows little understanding. Mason's best class - the one with Maroney, was ranked about the same as this one. Mason's BEST class. If Mason's best class helped us get a 4th quarter away from a Rose Bowl bid, then we surely have a decent chance to do the same with the last two classes being at or better than that one.

To make matters worse, Mason had a severe retention problem. If you look back on Mason's small number of 3*+ players, how many of them actually graduated or played a significant role on the football team. Sadly, not nearly as many as you'd think. Rather, a bunch of lowly-rated players blossomed within Mason's system to make Mason's teams competitive.

I fully agree with other posters here that Minnesota kids are lower ranked than they should be. I think the main reason is that, especially in the case of the outstate kids, nobody ever hears about them, there aren't videos produced about them, and they're simply not given a fair shake. You mean to tell me that no D-1 kids ever come out of Mankato or St. Cloud or Brainerd or Albert Lea or Rochester? Only the TC-area kids are even considered. Then those same outstate kids go to NDSU and make them nearly as competitive as we are, and we wonder why. Simply put, Minnesota kids are way underrated. Give them some weight training and let them grow into their freshman and sophomore bodies, and you have a lot of kids who might not have looked that great coming out of high school, but suddenly wham, they're men.

Where was Eric Decker from again? Anyone?
 


CNCMIN, right on. That's why I think the walk on program is so critical here. You can't waste your schollies on unprovens if you want to be a top school but 90% of this state never gets serious consideration because there is no way to qualify the kids. All there is is the camps and many outstaters don't know much about that process. Outstate coaches after watching their best and brightest get overlooked time and again no longer push the 'pipe dream', instead steering their kids to lower schools in search of the schollie rather than to the U in search of the opportunity. Prudent? yes.

I personally think this state is full of 2-3 star kids no one will ever know about. If we could open the pipe line we'd gain a huge edge, adding 3-4 great athletes per class without losing a schollie. it's almost like stealing.

i believe in every conference there are 2-3 kids that are capable of hanging with the kids in the B10. Out of all those kids quite a few could contribute. The real problem is you can tell which ones.
 

Schnoodler said:
CNCMIN, right on. That's why I think the walk on program is so critical here. You can't waste your schollies on unprovens if you want to be a top school but 90% of this state never gets serious consideration because there is no way to qualify the kids. All there is is the camps and many outstaters don't know much about that process. Outstate coaches after watching their best and brightest get overlooked time and again no longer push the 'pipe dream', instead steering their kids to lower schools in search of the schollie rather than to the U in search of the opportunity. Prudent? yes.

I personally think this state is full of 2-3 star kids no one will ever know about. If we could open the pipe line we'd gain a huge edge, adding 3-4 great athletes per class without losing a schollie. it's almost like stealing.

i believe in every conference there are 2-3 kids that are capable of hanging with the kids in the B10. Out of all those kids quite a few could contribute. The real problem is you can tell which ones.
Click to expand...

Internally, Nebraska says that their walk on program is like having an extra 4 scholarships per year.
 

Can we get a moderator to atleast view this forum?

What the hell has happened to the football forum? This is at least the 3rd troll type poster to show up in the last few weeks. Loon should have been kicked out the minute he attempted to post again, if Goldy74 is indeed Loon. Now we've got this guy arguing that the class Brewster brought in this year was similar to a usual Mason class?

Lets see: 2 ESPN game players and 1 US Army All American in this class. 5 of the top 6 players from in state. The class was rated 6th in the Big Ten by Rivals. Outside of the Maroney year (which I actually praised Mason's recruiting that year), what other year even remotely compares?

Nothing to see in this thread....like a lot of threads that have been started here in the last few weeks.
 

dinkything said:
which is the more likely scenario in 2010?

bcs caliber bowl:D

or

top 3 big 10 finish, and a new year's day bowl:)

or

4th place big 10 finish in the big 10 and down to san antonio for the alamo bowl:cool:

or

repeat of 2008 with bowl elegibility, and a minor bowl televised on a cable channel that no one gets :(

or

losing season, with an early-season a$$ whoopin' from southern cal, and home for the holidays :mad:

it has been a good week with a solid batch of recruits who've faxed in their loi's to dinkytown, although i must say (and i do not mean to be negative here) that it seems like a mason-esqe caliber recruiting class coming in...

realistically, if brewster leads the maroon and gold to san antonio during the next two seasons, then i will consider joel maturi's coaching change of two years ago to be a success.

anything more than san antonio will be considered a smashing success...

if the team struggles to achieve bowl elegibility...or worse...nahhhh, i don't want to even go there...
Click to expand...


Today, at the midpoint of this 2010 season, the quote above from 20+ months ago appears to have become a worst-case scenario.

Who knows? Maybe an unexpected turnaround is in the cards over the 2nd half of trhe season??:confused:
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom