Why Talent/Recruiting Rankings Matter

Donate To GopherHole
badgergopher said:
I think this is incredibly obvious. Half the job of a coach is to find the other team’s bad players/units, while hiding your own. Does anyone really argue talent doesn’t matter?


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

Talent that loses doesn't matter. It's about winning. Arbitrary words like "talent" don't define winning.
 

short ornery norwegian said:
I think one of the issues here is how "talent" is defined.

If "talent" is strictly based on star ratings and recruiting team rankings, then GWG's argument has merit.

I (and I suspect others) take a somewhat more expansive view of the term "talent." And I don't see star ratings and team rankings as a 100% infallible method of ranking "talent."

There are intangibles at play - some almost impossible to measure - heart, determination, drive, the will to win. Why do certain teams and certain players find a way to win close games, while other, equally 'talented' teams seem to find a way to lose close games? intangibles. I cover a HS team that has a lot of skilled athletes, but almost always finds a way to make a mistake at the worst possible time. To me, that is folded into the definition of "talent."

In that sense, coaching could be defined as helping players realize their talent to the fullest potential. I'm not sure you can separate one from the other. It's almost a chicken-and-egg debate. Where does the value of talent end and the value of coaching begin? How many angels can dance on the head of a pin? Why did I buy a canary yellow leisure suit for my roommate's wedding in 1977? Questions to ponder. (not christian or sam ponder - but sam is still hot)
Click to expand...

Truly awesome. Actual footage of SON from the 70s:

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/r1PtFuLQLJU" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
 

Look up winning percentages for early Patterson, Dantonio, Petersen, Meyer, etc. Do certain coaches tend to overachieve recruiting rankings while others underperform? I'd argue YES.

Unless we get a coach that can overachieve, develop players, and win, to create that positive feedback loop, or hotwire the process and recruit at a very high level right off the bat (extremely difficult IMO) we'll continue to struggle. Hopefully Fleck is the real deal in all areas.
 

Herd said:
Talent that loses doesn't matter. It's about winning. Arbitrary words like "talent" don't define winning.
Click to expand...

And if you don't play the winning talent such as Kobe McCrary after a performance like he had against MTSU, then that is a coaching error.
We should be 6-1 right now with a shot at the west title if the coaches would have been playing McCrary to soften up the other teams defense. But instead, all we hear is that we have no talent.
 

jrock said:
And if you don't play the winning talent such as Kobe McCrary after a performance like he had against MTSU, then that is a coaching error.
We should be 6-1 right now with a shot at the west title if the coaches would have been playing McCrary to soften up the other teams defense. But instead, all we hear is that we have no talent.
Click to expand...
That and adapting to your talent. Finally ran a bunch out of the I like we should have since week two.
 



Pompous Elitist said:
Yeah I like Croft under center as well. At least a good percent of the time.
Click to expand...

Considering he’s fumbled/bobbled several shotgun snaps in his short playing time already, if he’s in there I like him under center as well.
 

Ogee Oglethorpe said:
Considering he’s fumbled/bobbled several shotgun snaps in his short playing time already, if he’s in there I like him under center as well.
Click to expand...

I'm just curious, but what's your deal with the kid? He's barely played. Learning curve expected, or nah?
 

Was it a good coaching decision...to bring back Kiondre so soon after a hamstring? I'd say no. Just play the freaking freshmen PJ instead of bringing guys back too soon. Not many injuries sufficiently heal in a couple weeks. Now we've really got problems if one of Ayinde or Harris goes down. Just another questionable decision.
 



The more talented B1G teams were 6-1 today and are now 28-7 for the season.
 






GopherWeatherGuy said:
Again, this is based straight off of recruiting rankings.
Click to expand...

Not exactly. Recruiting rankings - those that never made it to campus - those that have left the team, etc., etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Spoofin said:
Not exactly. Recruiting rankings - those that never made it to campus - those that have left the team, etc., etc.


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

It's the composite of every individual recruits rating that is on the team. It is exactly recruiting rankings.
 


GopherWeatherGuy said:
It's the composite of every individual recruits rating that is on the team. It is exactly recruiting rankings.
Click to expand...

And why do you think they created this measurement rather than just using their initial class rankings?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Spoofin said:
And why do you think they created this measurement rather than just using their initial class rankings?


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

I already explained it to you once in this thread, go back and read it.
 

GopherWeatherGuy said:
I already explained it to you once in this thread, go back and read it.
Click to expand...

Right. Something like every team losses players so that all "evens out" so it is "exactly recruiting rankings". Right? I guess we should therefore ignore the flaws of recruiting rankings and treat them as gospel because they made this new skewed measurement for the sole purpose of trying to validate recruiting rankings.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Spoofin said:
Right. Something like every team losses players so that all "evens out" so it is "exactly recruiting rankings". Right? I guess we should therefore ignore the flaws of recruiting rankings and treat them as gospel because they made this new skewed measurement for the sole purpose of trying to validate recruiting rankings.


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

They matter. It's a proven fact. Get over it.
 

GopherWeatherGuy said:
They matter. It's a proven fact. Get over it.
Click to expand...

I've never said they don't matter. I have only said the difference between 20-60 is negligible and not the deciding factor in success. Your stats on tOSU beating Rutgers and this new measurement that 247 came up with for the sole purpose of hiding the biggest flaw with rankings does nothing for me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Spoofin said:
I've never said they don't matter. I have only said the difference between 20-60 is negligible and not the deciding factor in success. Your stats on tOSU beating Rutgers and this new measurement that 247 came up with for the sole purpose of hiding the biggest flaw with rankings does nothing for me.


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

Also false.
 


GopherWeatherGuy said:
Also false.
Click to expand...

How about this: We don't agree on recruiting rankings and likely won't. We don't agree on using this transparent "measurement" of "talent" and likely won't.

Also, I'll throw you a bone: I overestimated our talent at QB & WR this year. I didn't think it was great, but didn't think it was as gawd awful as it is either.

With that said, I have also been disappointed with a lot of the coaching decisions this year and don't think we need to be as bad as we are.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Spoofin said:
How about this: We don't agree on recruiting rankings and likely won't. We don't agree on using this transparent "measurement" of "talent" and likely won't.

Also, I'll throw you a bone: I overestimated our talent at QB & WR this year. I didn't think it was great, but didn't think it was as gawd awful as it is either.

With that said, I have also been disappointed with a lot of the coaching decisions this year and don't think we need to be as bad as we are.


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

And I criticized some of the play calling in the in game thread. But we're not going to win the west until we get better players.

:drink:
 

The problem remains Fleck isn't getting better players than our competitors. Hopefully he can reel in some big fish this year or next. We better hope he is one of the coaches that can outperform.

You never researched the early careers of the best coaches in the business - what was their winning percentage and national ranking situation vs recruiting rankings? I believe we did this with Dantonio this summer but I'd guess it applies to many of the top tier coaches.
 

GopherWeatherGuy said:
And I criticized some of the play calling in the in game thread. But we're not going to win the west until we get better players.

:drink:
Click to expand...

I don't think anybody would argue that good players are better, but the concern is hearing we will win when we have better players than our opponents. Almost every coach can win when they have better players, the special ones can win some when they don't. Fleck was sold as a special one and it is disappointing to hear that he'll win the games when we have clearly better talent. That should get us to about 9 wins at best and....
 

Pompous Elitist said:
The problem remains Fleck isn't getting better players than our competitors. Hopefully he can reel in some big fish this year or next. We better hope he is one of the coaches that can outperform.

You never researched the early careers of the best coaches in the business - what was their winning percentage and national ranking situation vs recruiting rankings? I believe we did this with Dantonio this summer but I'd guess it applies to many of the top tier coaches.
Click to expand...

Depending on the source, the Gophers are either 1st or 2nd in the west right now. Will that stick? I don't know but it's going to be an improvement regardless. Plus the most intriguing prospects are on the offensive side of the ball and that was also the case with his 3 week 2017 recruiting class.

As for some of the early coaches, are we talking their first job or their first years in the B1G? Dantonio won 7, 4, and 7 in his 3 years at Cincinnati. He then won 7, 9, and 6 in his first 3 years at Michigan St. The recruiting classes before he took over Michigan St were highly ranked. His second full recruiting class at Michigan St was also ranked 17th in the country.
 

You seem to have a hard time acknowledging some coaches are better than others at development and scheme.
 

Pompous Elitist said:
You seem to have a hard time acknowledging some coaches are better than others at development and scheme.
Click to expand...

No I don't, but talent is still the number one factor.

Although they should have beaten Purdue, and had opportunities to beat Maryland and Iowa, I think Fleck and staff have done a good job of staying competitive with a depleted secondary, thin/young OL, and almost no talent at QB and WR.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom