Why does Wisconsin have way better recruits than us?

[Ralph_Wiggum]

Hockey is a problem in MN since it takes resources away from football and basketball as well. High school hockey is not nearly as popular in WI. Maybe not so much in players, but in resources. Hockey should be a club sport and not in high schools.

 

[Sportsfan24]

I don't think we are talking about stars/rankings here, it is strictly about the total number of division 1 recruits that the state produces. Minnesota high school football produces less than some of the neighboring states.

The same methodology applies. The four star becomes a five the three becomes a four the kid who was a walk-on gets a offer and the kid who would have been considered for a walk-on opportunity, is considered. I have seen kids from Texas and Florida who where no better than kids in Minnesota get offers. Under the previous gopher coach and at Wisconsin

 

[GopherGod]

The same methodology applies. The four star becomes a five the three becomes a four the kid who was a walk-on gets a offer and the kid who would have been considered for a walk-on opportunity, is considered. I have seen kids from Texas and Florida who where no better than kids in Minnesota get offers. Under the previous gopher coach and at Wisconsin

I wasn't talking about Florida or Texas recruits, I was talking about the number of Division 1 athletes produced by states with a smaller population than Minnesota yet still producing more D1 athletes than Minnesota. You would think in those states it would be a lot harder to get noticed because the athletes are not concentrated in a large metro area like the Twin Cities which makes it easier for recruiters. The fact that they still are producing the same or more as Minnesota tells me that at the youth and high school level they are doing a better job of developing the talent overall.

 

[Gopherhurrin]

Not all groups have the same athletic talent as all other groups. There is more pure football talent in southern states and rust belt states. More quickness.

 

[lakesgopher]

not so much a talent difference as much as a style difference. im pretty sure if florida played in columbus or ann arbor at the end of nov early dec we would see big ten teams beating the hell out of southern teams.

 

[Schnoodler]

Here you go.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/webextra/content/2010/recruits/starsearch.aspx

What a terrible use of data.

Those are BCS teams only. BCS teams have a higher density in certain areas, Teams recruit more aggressivly locally.


For distance recruiting you rely on evaluation of known talent. Thus if the talent is unrecognized it is not recruited.

Tufts is a perfect example. One of the fastest kids in the country and very few know of him. If he was in texas he'd be 4 star and loaded with offers. Same kid, different perception.

 

[Sportsfan24]

I wasn't talking about Florida or Texas recruits, I was talking about the number of Division 1 athletes produced by states with a smaller population than Minnesota yet still producing more D1 athletes than Minnesota. You would think in those states it would be a lot harder to get noticed because the athletes are not concentrated in a large metro area like the Twin Cities which makes it easier for recruiters. The fact that they still are producing the same or more as Minnesota tells me that at the youth and high school level they are doing a better job of developing the talent overall.

I will make one final attempt. Wisconsin doesn't produce better football players than Minnesota (see the NFL). Wisconsin highschool players are THOUGHT better than Minnesota because of the success of the Badger program. Once the Gophers start winning (this year) at a higher level. Gopher recruits (highschool football players) will be thought more superior or better. Since the Gophers have more players from Minnesota than any other state, Minnesota highschool football players will receive a boost.

I realize you were not speaking of Florida or Texas, I only offered it up to demonstrate how highschool football players on the same level or below (not the top echelon Florida and Texas players) are assumed better because of the success of the colleges while recruiting predominately from those states.

Now before folks scream, I'm in no way saying that Minnesota is on par with those states. I'm saying that a level of players (after the top 25-50) are incorrectly assumed superior than Minnesota players (ie ranked higher and/or receive scholarships). The same thing applies to Wisconsin players for the same reason, only to a much lessor extent.

How did I do?

 

[Rosemountian]

If Eden Praire ran something other than the Wing-T. They would produce more football players with D-1 scholarship offers. Also, if they didn't play their best guys both ways every year.

 

[GopherGod]

I will make one final attempt. Wisconsin doesn't produce better football players than Minnesota (see the NFL). Wisconsin highschool players are THOUGHT better than Minnesota because of the success of the Badger program. Once the Gophers start winning (this year) at a higher level. Gopher recruits (highschool football players) will be thought more superior or better. Since the Gophers have more players from Minnesota than any other state, Minnesota highschool football players will receive a boost.

I realize you were not speaking of Florida or Texas, I only offered it up to demonstrate how highschool football players on the same level or below (not the top echelon Florida and Texas players) are assumed better because of the success of the colleges while recruiting predominately from those states.

Now before folks scream, I'm in no way saying that Minnesota is on par with those states. I'm saying that a level of players (after the top 25-50) are incorrectly assumed superior than Minnesota players (ie ranked higher and/or receive scholarships). The same thing applies to Wisconsin players for the same reason, only to a much lessor extent.

How did I do?

So according to you it is just a perception problem as to why more Minnesota kids are not playing Division 1 football and that is because the University of Minnesota is not deemed successful. It couldn't possibly be that it just isn't developed and supported here like other states. If this is what you are claiming, then how do you explain states such as Nevada, Kansas, Arkansas, Hawaii, Colorado, and Mississippi. All of these states produce more division 1 football talent than Minnesota, have smaller populations, and do not have more successful college football programs than Minnesota.

 

[GopherGod]

What a terrible use of data.

Those are BCS teams only. BCS teams have a higher density in certain areas, Teams recruit more aggressivly locally.


For distance recruiting you rely on evaluation of known talent. Thus if the talent is unrecognized it is not recruited.

Tufts is a perfect example. One of the fastest kids in the country and very few know of him. If he was in texas he'd be 4 star and loaded with offers. Same kid, different perception.

First off go back and read because it was not BCS teams only. In regards to the rest of your statement, many of the states that Minnesota was trailing have a lower population density than Minnesota yet they are still getting talent recognized and recruited. Could it be that they are just doing a better job of supporting and developing more talent at the high school levels?