What grade would you give the Gophers 2015 recruiting class?

Class grade

  • A

    Votes: 17 10.2%

  • B

    Votes: 87 52.1%

  • C

    Votes: 49 29.3%

  • D

    Votes: 11 6.6%

  • F

    Votes: 3 1.8%
  • Total voters
    167
Donate To GopherHole
E

El Amin Fan

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
2,925
Reaction score
875
Points
113
It's grade time, what are you giving this class?
 

I'm pretty sure it's not grade time until we actually see them play in some games! Haha. I'd give it a potential grade of B though. Definitely one of the most promising classes that Kill has brought in on paper, and some of those highlights tapes are very impressive.
 

B+ Overall.
A for being the best class to date.
B for needing to take a few projects to fill the class.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

WAGopher said:
B+ Overall.
A for being the best class to date.
B for needing to take a few projects to fill the class.


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

I like this statement.
 

C+/B-, so I went with C. Rankings aside, this class doesn't seem as good as last year's. It's probably deeper and we don't have some of the reaches we had last year, but it doesn't seem to me like we have as many difference makers.
 


Start with a C and go up or down depending on the future.
 

WAGopher said:
B+ Overall.
A for being the best class to date.
B for needing to take a few projects to fill the class.


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

Well said. Agree 100%.
 

B for missing out of Whitfield and Milan. Would have been an A with those two.
 

Today I would give it a 3 out of 5 stars...
 



For those who voted D or F, what were your expectations for a recruiting class this year?
 

I gave it a B, although i really like this class as a group i think we needed to pull another DL into the mix. he might still be out there for Kill to get but next year will be chance to get some DL

and we already got a great one committed!
 

I went with a "C" - because they did not have an option for "I don't know."

Look - we hope that most of these kids pan out and become contributors for the Gophers, but until they actually put on the pads and start playing, there's no way to be sure. It's easy to get excited by a highlight tape, but I'm always leery of those because it's hard to gauge the level of competition.

We've all see highly-heralded recruits flop, and we've seen unheralded recruits blossom into major contributors. Only time will tell which category this year's recruits will belong in.
 

I gave it a 5-star being an AP-A. 4-star A, etc.

Our "GPA" was about a 2.87 which is slightly above a B-
 





Jeshurun said:
For those who voted D or F, what were your expectations for a recruiting class this year?
Click to expand...

I think it is closer to a D than to an A. Depends what are your criteria is though. I see us ranked around 50 in the nation, lower half of the big10, and teams like Ohio St in our conference with outstanding classes. I gave it a C.
 


btowngopher said:
I'd love to know who these kids were.
Click to expand...

<blockquoteclass="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>He already signed elsewhere. RT <a href="https://twitter.com/MVofDT">@MVofDT</a>: So, four star whom Kill just turned down. We just lost out on a couple guys. Call us maybe?</p>— Ryan Burns (@RyanBurnsGI) <a href="https://twitter.com/RyanBurnsGI/status/563041057185992707">February 4, 2015</a></blockquote> <script asyncsrc="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 



Turn down a 4 star? Tim Brewster never would have!

If Jerry and his staff turned down a 4 star he probably had some serious issues or they felt he wouldn't develop. These guys have a good long track record of finding players they can win with. I wouldn't worry about them.

And I agree, that offensive line class looks like something Wisconsin would put together. Big, Big boys.
 

I think on WCCO Sunday morning Kill said the same thing. They would have loved to take the kid but they just had too many players at that position - maybe they can grayshirt the kid or stash him in a CC for a year if there are enough seniors graduating at that position.
 


Hard to give an overall grade. Like others have said, it's always a C until they hit the playing field.

I think they did really well in some position groups, particularly the O-line and the defensive backfield. I think Buford and Johnson could be big-time guys at the back of the defense.

Disappointed they didn't do more with the D-line. Milan would have been a great addition. Didn't do much at LB either.

But the coaching staff knows what they are doing and how to get guys to fit their system.
 

What I like from this class:

1. Offensive line. 5 bona fide B1G O-lineman! 3 out-of-state recruits with good offer lists, 2 MN kids that committed early that otherwise would have had some big offers. This was a position of need coming in, and it might be the best O-line class we've had.

2. DBs. Another position of need, and we recruited a lot of them. 3 safeties (including a desperately needed JUCO) and 4 corners so there is good balance. Sawvel should have fun molding these guys for years to come. I'm sure at least 3 will play come Sept. 3.

3. Wide Receivers. Not a position of need since we redshirted 3 last year, but we got our top target (Register) and added Still. Both are big, athletic, and look like they could have futures as good B1G WRs.

What I don't like:

1. OLB. My understanding is that the staff views Julian Huff as an ILB, so we are left w/o a single OLB in this class. Not sure why we didn't pursue some other options than Whitfield, it seemed pretty clear he was never that interested in being here and didn't seem like he was worth pursuing to the very end

2. D-line. Ending up with only 2 D-lineman wasn't enough for this class. Since we played 4 freshman last year and red-shirted 1, we will now have only 3 D-lineman spread across the last 2 classes (Kafo, Winston, Hall). This needs to be a priority for 2016, so it's good that we have Garcia in the mix already.

3. Running Backs. We ended up with 3, but I don't think any of them are as good as the two we got last year. Time will tell.

Overall, our recruiting classes aren't going to be excellent when we only have 4 MN kids with D-1 offers. We'll do better in years when there are 8-10 D-1 prospects, like next year. Croft is a step up from any QB recruit since Nelson, but I'm not sold yet as he still seems really raw. I like that we got 7 DBs, but the 1 recruit from last year (Craig James) had a far better offer list than any of the 7 this year. I also think the upside of Elmore and Richardson is higher than who we ended up with on the D-line this year.

2016 could shape up to be a top-20 class. Garcia would have been the highest rated recruit in this class, and we will hopefully have another soon with Coughlin.
 

Put me in the camp that is going with C based mostly on the fact that you can't really assign any sort of grade until you get a chance to actually see them play. With that in mind the only real measuring stick we have right now is how the class stacks up against the rest of the conference on paper.

Looking at Rivals, 10 teams have an average per recruit ranking that is better then ours. 1 is equal (Iowa) and that leaves 2 that are lower (Rutgers, Purdue). So on PAPER this is a middle of the pack or slightly lower class, therefore a C.

As for an accurate grade, need to wait at least 2-3 years before you can make one of those in regards to a recruiting class.
 

I think we all know that you can't accurately grade a class yet and that no one knows how good the players are going to be. The purpose of assigning a grade is to "predict" how well you think the recruits will turn out to be, did we get our top targets, and how well we did at filling our needs, i.e. we needed 4 LBs and only got 2. This is isn't algebra it's subjective.
 

O-line and D-backs will be OK after this class. As for the rest of the positions in this class I don't see many starters for the future. A lot of depth here, which all-in-all is good, but you would like to get a few plug-n-play guys each year in case of injuries or they are good enough to start. I don't see that with any of these guys. No Steven Richardsons or Gaelin Elmores in this group. They'll need a lot of time in the weight and film rooms.

I'll give them a B-
 

Going to say C- to C. That can always change up or down but at first glance not impressive but solid. Hopefully we see further growth in recruiting especially next season. We have coaches that make players better now they need top line talent they can make elite!
 

FishingMN said:
I went with D - seems like the vast majority of these guys had very few, if any, BCS offers.
Click to expand...

Always cracks me up when i see guys who post one or two days a year feeling compelled to rag on the home team.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom