Why are we 14th (last) in 2022 B1G recruiting?

Ewert86PC

Metrodome Era Survivor
Joined
Sep 11, 2010
Messages
5,324
Reaction score
620
Points
113
We're the 11th best college town in the B1G Conference. Only Rutgers (New Brunswick, NJ) at 43/150, Ohio State (Columbus, OH) at 96/150 and Nebraska (Lincoln, NE) which didn't make the top 150 came in lower than Minneapolis at 39/150.

The other 10 B1G Conference schools were in the top 35. Six made the top 20.

 

gophernut1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2019
Messages
534
Reaction score
674
Points
93
In years past the gap between #5 and #14 was huge in comparison to this year. It shows the depth of the B1G. While being 14 is not great, most of our recruits are above the level that other coaches ever got. However, I have no problems with people who are concerned because it does impact our ability to go to the next level if recruiting does not go up. Transfer portal and NIL will change things and I hope the Gophers adjust to this in a positive way.

I would say our eye for talent, ability to coach up and the closeness of the rankings makes me not as worried as some. Still, I was hoping for a better number like I am sure most of you were as well.
 

60's Guy

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 29, 2010
Messages
6,557
Reaction score
1,636
Points
113
We just lost a highly rated guy and haven’t had time to replace him. Biggest reason: I don’t believe we have had THE BAR B Q yet. That’s good for 6-8 guys each year.
 

Boomtime

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 29, 2021
Messages
877
Reaction score
426
Points
63
Yep....we are screwed.....

Iowa - #6 - 2 four star - 16 three star
Minnesota - #14 - 2 four star - 16 three star

Have a hard time figuring out how their class would be 8 spots better than ours.
It's not complicated at all. Iowa's 3* are high 3* and ours are mostly low 3*, bordering on 2*.

And I agree with the big losses with kids portaling out at Minnesota... high school kids will be less important here and the biggest factor will be if Fleck can find a few guys to transfer in.
 

pharmacygopher

114 Row 11
Joined
Mar 4, 2009
Messages
2,211
Reaction score
361
Points
83
It's not complicated at all. Iowa's 3* are high 3* and ours are mostly low 3*, bordering on 2*.

And I agree with the big losses with kids portaling out at Minnesota... high school kids will be less important here and the biggest factor will be if Fleck can find a few guys to transfer in.
Huh? I'll use 247 composite are arbitrarily make these my cutoffs

80-83 low 3 star
84-86 mid star
87-89 high 3 star

1 player each was rated at 82 and 83. I don't see anyone bordering two stars at all.

12 would be mid 3 stars plus two high 3 stars. Plus the two 4 stars.

I don't get hung up in stars (like to look at stars and offers) but I think that shows how well Fleck has raised the floor of the program to minimize the 'down years'. Gotta keep working on the ceiling.
 



MNVCGUY

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
13,496
Reaction score
8,724
Points
113
It's not complicated at all. Iowa's 3* are high 3* and ours are mostly low 3*, bordering on 2*.
That line isn't even remotely close to being true.

Their 3* recruits have a slightly higher composite ranking in general than ours but as has been pointed out many times, it is pretty foolish to put a lot of stock in the difference between a .8732 and a .8504
 

Gophers_4life

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
7,899
Reaction score
737
Points
113
Huh? I'll use 247 composite are arbitrarily make these my cutoffs

80-83 low 3 star
84-86 mid star
87-89 high 3 star

1 player each was rated at 82 and 83. I don't see anyone bordering two stars at all.

12 would be mid 3 stars plus two high 3 stars. Plus the two 4 stars.

I don't get hung up in stars (like to look at stars and offers) but I think that shows how well Fleck has raised the floor of the program to minimize the 'down years'. Gotta keep working on the ceiling.
Yep.

And like I posted above, one player who was born and raised in Iowa and decided to stay home instead of go to Alabama, Notre Dame, or any other school in the nation, as opposed to our "meager" 4 star recruit, was the difference between our 18-commit #14 class and their 18-commit #7 class in the conference. :rolleyes:
 

DarthGopher

Active member
Joined
Dec 5, 2021
Messages
89
Reaction score
155
Points
33
No human being on the planet knows the difference between a group of high school kids rated at .866 and another rated .865.
But it does generate web traffic, and therefore revenue, which is the objective.

Reframing it as a probability, let's say these scores represented the likelihood of winning $100K in a lottery drawing. Person A buys a ticket with a 86.50% chance of winning and Person B buys a ticket with an 86.86% chance of winning. Should person B start making plans for how they are going to spend that $100K because they are 0.36% higher? Personally, I would not. :)
 



PMWinSTP

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 11, 2015
Messages
11,811
Reaction score
2,223
Points
113
I feel like the player ratings have been steadily going up overall. In 2015 there were seven programs with an AVG payer rating in the 90s for their recruiting classes. 2022 had 13.
 

MNVCGUY

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
13,496
Reaction score
8,724
Points
113
But it does generate web traffic, and therefore revenue, which is the objective.

Reframing it as a probability, let's say these scores represented the likelihood of winning $100K in a lottery drawing. Person A buys a ticket with a 86.50% chance of winning and Person B buys a ticket with an 86.86% chance of winning. Should person B start making plans for how they are going to spend that $100K because they are 0.36% higher? Personally, I would not. :)
Interesting way of framing it. The other missing factor is that the person setting the probabilities is just guessing with nothing concrete behind it that would guarantee any sort of accuracy in the odds.

They might say your chance of winning is higher when in reality the other person actually has a much better ticket with much higher odds of success.
 

GophersInIowa

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
30,774
Reaction score
8,559
Points
113
This has been my position about rankings for many years now. Comparing “high” and “low” 3-star players out 2 decimal places by some recruiter is pointless. Fit to the program and the ability/desire to stay in the program matter way more than anything at that point.
This. I like to look at who we're beating to get the recruits too. If we're always beating a bunch of MAC-level schools only, that's probably not good.
 

SonjayLarrick

Active member
Joined
Aug 9, 2021
Messages
280
Reaction score
186
Points
43
I like going by just 247's ratings, but we are still 14th there as well: https://247sports.com/Season/2022-Football/TeamRankings/?Conference=Big-Ten

- Minnesota is ranked #14, and has an average rating of 86.50
- Maryland is ranked #6, and has an average rating of 86.86


So ... they way they do these rankings just seems arbitrary and made up.
Here is how 247 explains their scoring system.

Five-stars (98-110 rating): The top 32 players in the country to mirror the 32 first round picks in the NFL Draft. These are 32 players that we believe are the most likely to be drafted in the first round from each recruiting class. The full list of 32 with five-star ratings typically isn’t complete until the final ranking. Any player with a rating of more than 100 is considered a “franchise player” and one that does not come around in every recruiting class.

Four-stars (90-97 rating): These are players that we believe are the most likely to produce college careers that get them drafted. By National Signing Day, this number is typically in the range of 350 prospects, roughly the top 10 percent of prospects in a given class.

Three-stars (80-89 rating): This is where the bulk of college football prospects are found and it incorporates a large range of ability levels, all of whom we consider as possible NFL players long term.

A high three-star (87-89): is considered a player with significant NFL upside who expect to be an impact college football player.

A mid three-star (84-86): is a player that we consider to be a capable starter for a Power Five football team and an impact player at the Group of Five level.

A low three-star (80-83): is a player that we consider to be a potential contributor at a Power Five program but a probable Group of Five starter with impact potential.

Two-stars (70-79 rating): These are prospects that we consider to be FBS-level players with very limited NFL potential.
 



Plato

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 14, 2019
Messages
1,237
Reaction score
850
Points
113
We're the 11th best college town in the B1G Conference. Only Rutgers (New Brunswick, NJ) at 43/150, Ohio State (Columbus, OH) at 96/150 and Nebraska (Lincoln, NE) which didn't make the top 150 came in lower than Minneapolis at 39/150.

The other 10 B1G Conference schools were in the top 35. Six made the top 20.

Any ranking that has W Lafayette and Morgantown in the top 10 is very suspect.
 


Dakota2

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 9, 2020
Messages
1,482
Reaction score
1,101
Points
113
But it does generate web traffic, and therefore revenue, which is the objective.

Reframing it as a probability, let's say these scores represented the likelihood of winning $100K in a lottery drawing. Person A buys a ticket with a 86.50% chance of winning and Person B buys a ticket with an 86.86% chance of winning. Should person B start making plans for how they are going to spend that $100K because they are 0.36% higher? Personally, I would not. :)
Your point is good but the comparison is not. Lottery odds are real, programmed in. Recruit rankings are guesses.
 

Boomtime

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 29, 2021
Messages
877
Reaction score
426
Points
63
Huh? I'll use 247 composite are arbitrarily make these my cutoffs

80-83 low 3 star
84-86 mid star
87-89 high 3 star

1 player each was rated at 82 and 83. I don't see anyone bordering two stars at all.

12 would be mid 3 stars plus two high 3 stars. Plus the two 4 stars.

I don't get hung up in stars (like to look at stars and offers) but I think that shows how well Fleck has raised the floor of the program to minimize the 'down years'. Gotta keep working on the ceiling.
I'm just explaining the the "level" of the 3* rating explains the difference between Iowa and Minnesota that was questioned.

Nothing more and nothing less. And I agree that 24/7 is a better barometer than Rivals because some of the Rival's rankings are based on kids attending their camps.
 

Boomtime

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 29, 2021
Messages
877
Reaction score
426
Points
63
That line isn't even remotely close to being true.

Their 3* recruits have a slightly higher composite ranking in general than ours but as has been point
ed out many times, it is pretty foolish to put a lot of stock in the difference between a .8732 and a .8504
No one is disputing what might be minimal differences in the numbers. But it explains the difference between why a team might be 5-6 places lower in the rankings.

As I said and others have as well... teams are putting varying levels of emphasis on the portal kids, so Minnesota's poor ranking for high school recruiting might not be a big deal in the big picture.

Seems like schools with coaching turnover are using the portal much more. Whatever is happening here is resulting in a lot of coming and going. Maybe the new OC played into that?
 

Joined
Nov 16, 2021
Messages
53
Reaction score
72
Points
18
However, I have no problems with people who are concerned because it does impact our ability to go to the next level if recruiting does not go up. Transfer portal and NIL will change things and I hope the Gophers adjust to this in a positive way.
This is my concern. Recruits also look at these lists. It's easy for us to scoff and say it doesn't really matter now, but when kids get contacted by our recruiters, and they see we are ranked last, there is less incentive for them to join a poor class. This is especially true for out of state kids.
 

hungan1

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 20, 2011
Messages
12,884
Reaction score
3,114
Points
113
That line isn't even remotely close to being true.

Their 3* recruits have a slightly higher composite ranking in general than ours but as has been pointed out many times, it is pretty foolish to put a lot of stock in the difference between a .8732 and a .8504
Let's not get hung up on stars too much. Antoine Winfield Jr was rated 0.8285 out of H.S.
 

hungan1

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 20, 2011
Messages
12,884
Reaction score
3,114
Points
113
It is beyond my comprehension to understand how they can distinguish talent ratings to four decimal places, the accuracy of the size of a gnat's buttinski.

Boy, they must work hard on their precision sitting down at offices somewhere pulling rabbits out of outhouses.
 

short ornery norwegian

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
13,569
Reaction score
5,895
Points
113
I think a lot of this is being driven by the philosophy on the portal.

Based on what we've seen the last couple of years, it's beginning to look as if MN uses HS recruiting for depth and developmental players. Then, they assess the remaining needs on the team and fill those needs by going to the portal.

So, if the HS recruiting class has a lower score, it's not the end of the world. Because the needs not being filed by HS recruits will be filled through the portal.

What we could use would be a 'master' recruiting ranking that takes everything into account - HS recruits, grad transfers and portal transfers.

the current rankings are like a mid-term score. It doesn't take into account that you can pull up your overall grade by acing the final.
 

Joined
Nov 16, 2021
Messages
53
Reaction score
72
Points
18
Based on what we've seen the last couple of years, it's beginning to look as if MN uses HS recruiting for depth and developmental players.
This is a tricky game to play. There are only so many schools that turn 3 star kids into NFL prospects. Considering how important talented depth charts are today, from the front 7 to the RB and WR rooms, unless you're able to truly develop 3 star kids (Wisconsin is unfortunately great at this) then it'll be a tough go for ya. But we're stuck in a weird spot, as we've seen with kids leaving recently - when you recruit a handful of highly ranked guys, and they then get upset they are losing their spot on the depth chart to a lower ranked/seemingly worse player, they then hit the transfer portal.

I just think there's a fine line between building depth and actually getting guys that are legit contributors 3-4 years into the program. Seeing PJ's roster building makes me hopeful but I'm still cautious
 

Pete smith

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 12, 2017
Messages
1,237
Reaction score
342
Points
83
Why should PJ sign a 4 or 5 star, when a helmet school who needs a running back or an offensive linemen, comes in and offers $500,000 or more with NIL.. much like what happened to Iowa State basketball and their point guard. Iowa State couldn’t match so he‘s gone. Sad
 

Dakota2

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 9, 2020
Messages
1,482
Reaction score
1,101
Points
113
This is my concern. Recruits also look at these lists. It's easy for us to scoff and say it doesn't really matter now, but when kids get contacted by our recruiters, and they see we are ranked last, there is less incentive for them to join a poor class. This is especially true for out of state kids.
Recruits look at the record on the field.
 

Joined
Nov 16, 2021
Messages
53
Reaction score
72
Points
18
Why should PJ sign a 4 or 5 star, when a helmet school who needs a running back or an offensive linemen, comes in and offers $500,000 or more with NIL.. much like what happened to Iowa State basketball and their point guard. Iowa State couldn’t match so he‘s gone. Sad
This is the problem with NIL. Eventually the 4 stars that would have gone to Minnesota will start going to blue bloods just for a piece of the pie
 

Ewert86PC

Metrodome Era Survivor
Joined
Sep 11, 2010
Messages
5,324
Reaction score
620
Points
113
Any ranking that has W Lafayette and Morgantown in the top 10 is very suspect.
Well, they're rankings are based on

Affordability:
Rent for a one bedroom apartment (-4x)*
net cost (-4x)*
median student loan debt (-3x)

Social life and culture:
Walk score (4x),
bike score (3x),
entertainment options per 100,000 residents (2.5x),
restaurants per 100,000 residents (2.5x),
Power 5 (2x),
student to population ratio (2x)*

College quality:
Graduation rate (2x)*
retention rate (2.5x)*
median pay after ten years (2x)*
spending per student (1.5x)*
median number of undergraduates (1.5x)*
admission rate (-1x)*

I can see each asterisked criteria (*) weighing heavily against Minneapolis and in favor places like W Lafayette and Morgantown. Add to the mix the law enforcement mismanagement by the city and its not a reach.
 

Bob_Loblaw

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 23, 2009
Messages
16,130
Reaction score
7,111
Points
113
Huh? I'll use 247 composite are arbitrarily make these my cutoffs

80-83 low 3 star
84-86 mid star
87-89 high 3 star

1 player each was rated at 82 and 83. I don't see anyone bordering two stars at all.

12 would be mid 3 stars plus two high 3 stars. Plus the two 4 stars.

I don't get hung up in stars (like to look at stars and offers) but I think that shows how well Fleck has raised the floor of the program to minimize the 'down years'. Gotta keep working on the ceiling.
Boomtime is a an Iowa troll who disappears for a bit and comes back and pretends to be one of us again.
 






Top Bottom