I don’t see us bringing in a ton of CHL kids. If some of the top unsigned draft picks want to play a year or two it could be interesting. Would have been nice years ago when Peter Mueller went to CHL route. What MN kids are playing CHL right now? Gracyn Sawchyn only name I can think of.
If anything the % of players from MN in NCAA Div I has increased and this is but one recruiting cycle. Every top program has a swing and miss session on occasion, and we still have no idea what rabbits Bob might find in his hat from sources such as de-commits, diamonds in the rough (uncommitteds), the CHL and the portal.
Bob should be driving down 35 to Shattuck and having a chat with Davidson and Wendt. Davidson is putting up 1.2 PPG getting quality minutes in the Elite League and Wendt is putting up video game numbers right now (0.80 GAA, .965 SA% w/ 3 SO in 5 games)
Davidson feels like he could be one of the top remaining uncommitted players on the board. Wonder if tBob is putting up the full court press.
Davidson down to BC, DU and Minnesota if you go by Insta follows which these days is pretty accurate. If you beat out BC and DU for a recruit you’ve earned it.
I am in the club that leans towards pessimism about lack of high-end MN commitments at this point. While the staff may be keeping an eye on some CHL players, just in case, I don't think it is likely there is any secret plan in place for this. And yes, late developers can turn into better than expected players by the time they are college age, or a guy can flip his commitment. But I think those just using those options doesn't leave much margin for error. Things have changed from 15 years ago. Over recruiting the number of players hasn't resulted in players shying away from those schools like many of us thought. With the transfer portal and all the student movement, it isn't a big thing for a player who committed to a school who sees he hasn't developed to the level the school expected and therefore decides to jump to a school where he will get more ice time. While depth and teamwork are a huge driver for success, you can't deny that having a few superstars that can turn a game around single-handedly at any point is often what pushes a team into championship contention. Getting a number of top end recruits increases the odds you will have those types of players. Then you just have to make sure you get the right players to fill out the rest of the team (which seems like it has been the issue with some teams in the best that had one or two great lines, but then nothing.)
I like the way this year and next look, but would like to feel like the following years are looking similar. (And I realize a lot could still happen before then, but I would rather feel like things are very good and could get better, than things need to get better.)
What concerns me isn't Bob, but that the Minnesota Golden Gopher hockey brand could potentially have lost some of the luster it once had, and that D1 hockey will continue down the path of the sports revenue schools that other collegiate sports have. Michigan, Notre Dame, BU, BC. Add in the schools like Denver, a small college atmosphere, the high end academic colleges like Harvard, and the in-state and midwestern rivals like UMD, NoDak, and Wisconsin there is a lot of competition for MN talent.
Your last sentence reflects the last 30 or so years. That's nothing new.
I've been following this program for decades... and I have seen variations of the above statement made numerous times over that span... and it eventually gets debunked. People were writing the program off in Woog's final years, etc. Lucia dealt with it at times too. This is nothing new.
Too much hand wringing going on over one recruiting "season".
What concerns me isn't Bob, but that the Minnesota Golden Gopher hockey brand could potentially have lost some of the luster it once had, and that D1 hockey will continue down the path of the sports revenue schools that other collegiate sports have. Michigan, Notre Dame, BU, BC. Add in the schools like Denver, a small college atmosphere, the high end academic colleges like Harvard, and the in-state and midwestern rivals like UMD, NoDak, and Wisconsin there is a lot of competition for MN talent.
Your last sentence reflects the last 30 or so years. That's nothing new.
I've been following this program for decades... and I have seen variations of the above statement made numerous times over that span... and it eventually gets debunked. People were writing the program off in Woog's final years, etc. Lucia dealt with it at times too. This is nothing new.
Too much hand wringing going on over one recruiting "season".
While there has always been a few players that went to Notre Dame or Wisconsin over even a longer period of time than 30 years, but this is a completely different era. And the Gophers always got the top level talent from the state even in down years.
More D1 programs. Expanded areas of hockey development. NIL. The apparent rule change allowing Canadien junior players to be eligible. The fact that it has been more than 20 years since this team won a National Championship.
This was undeniably a top level group of commitment age kids from Minnesota. And it is undeniable that the Gophers struck out on all of the elite players from this group. Perhaps the single data point argument will in the long run make these worries be moot, but the concern still has to be there. With all of the competitive pressure in recruiting, these new recruiting competitors seemingly invading Minnesota's turf shows how precarious the recruiting situation can be.
And, as I have said, if this is a real recruiting issue and the team reacts to remain competitive, it really could change the brand of Gopher hockey in a way that would impact at least my love of the team. AS Minnesota hockey recruits chase the more media/NIL glorified teams, the Gophers would have to respond by going further out of state to recruit, most likely heavily into Canada and with the older player approach. I don't know about you, but having a mercenary team like other college sports isn't as compelling.
It's one recruiting cycle. That's not a losing streak.
They've been to 2 NC games since the last win and several other FF's. They didn't fail to close those out because of recruiting either.
I guess I'd be fine with a Moe, Davidson, Sawchyn (CHL) recruit list right now - especially with the D recruits that the program has in the pipeline in front of them.
Bob could be looking at his roster right now (his current stud freshmen) and the 2025 class (also looks like a bunch of immediate contributors), and say to himself - "I want these guys to get as much ice as possible together early after this year". Aka - let the players that REALLY want the M on their chest to be the ones that come to him and push who he already knows committed.
I will never fight the recruiting of a 3-4 year player that grows into a great player vs. a one and done great player. Its honestly harder to find in todays transfer portal world - so I trust in Bob. Get your guys.
Say it with me now "I'm ready, for Teddy".
While there has always been a few players that went to Notre Dame or Wisconsin over even a longer period of time than 30 years, but this is a completely different era. And the Gophers always got the top level talent from the state even in down years.
More D1 programs.
All of the teams you mentioned in the post I originally responded to are not new programs who suddenly sprung up to create additional competition for the Gophers. Those are all long time good programs who have always competed with the U for top kids. This is not something new. And the "new" programs are not the ones who are grabbing the kids we are after.
As somebody who followed recruiting extremely closely for 25+ years, if you think this is the first time the Gophers missed out on some top local kids in one recruiting class, that's a very incorrect take.
"Top level talent" is also misnomer unless they actually produce in college. We've seen many kids (here and elsewhere) who look like world beaters in HS or juniors but don't quite do the same in college. We could probably put together a pre-college Hall of Fame list of kids who were tabbed as "special" before college and then see it not quite work out that way in reality.
In my view, you are overreacting to a brief period of time. It is the same stuff we heard when Woog refused to adjust his ways from MN HS kids and everybody was dumping on the program. Some of these comments are no different than what I saw out of many UND fans did a year or two ago when they had some misses on the recruiting trail.
I could understand questioning whether a staff member was doing the job or not... but it isn't the program. There's is literally nothing that we don't have here that any other program has to offer. Particularly from the standpoint of funding, scholarships, etc. And NIL (at this point) is largely one of the most overrated angles there is from a college hockey perspective.
https://twitter.com/USAHockeyNTDP/status/1844830330789777898?t=HaztNwU18ID7pkq1lWHW7A&s=19
I mean come on Bob, why haven’t we locked him in yet??
Yeah this one I don’t get. Either we’ve offered and he hasn’t committed yet or we haven’t offered yet, both of which are equally concerning.
There’s a much greater chance the U has offered & he hasn’t decided to commit just yet. It’s not like he’s a player they’ll put a time limit on him committing (anytime soon). Isn’t he (an old) junior in HS at EP…assuming he returns from Madison for the HS season?Yeah this one I don’t get. Either we’ve offered and he hasn’t committed yet or we haven’t offered yet, both of which are equally concerning.
While there has always been a few players that went to Notre Dame or Wisconsin over even a longer period of time than 30 years, but this is a completely different era. And the Gophers always got the top level talent from the state even in down years.
More D1 programs.
All of the teams you mentioned in the post I originally responded to are not new programs who suddenly sprung up to create additional competition for the Gophers. Those are all long time good programs who have always competed with the U for top kids. This is not something new. And the "new" programs are not the ones who are grabbing the kids we are after.
As somebody who followed recruiting extremely closely for 25+ years, if you think this is the first time the Gophers missed out on some top local kids in one recruiting class, that's a very incorrect take.
"Top level talent" is also misnomer unless they actually produce in college. We've seen many kids (here and elsewhere) who look like world beaters in HS or juniors but don't quite do the same in college. We could probably put together a pre-college Hall of Fame list of kids who were tabbed as "special" before college and then see it not quite work out that way in reality.
In my view, you are overreacting to a brief period of time. It is the same stuff we heard when Woog refused to adjust his ways from MN HS kids and everybody was dumping on the program. Some of these comments are no different than what I saw out of many UND fans did a year or two ago when they had some misses on the recruiting trail.
I could understand questioning whether a staff member was doing the job or not... but it isn't the program. There's is literally nothing that we don't have here that any other program has to offer. Particularly from the standpoint of funding, scholarships, etc. And NIL (at this point) is largely one of the most overrated angles there is from a college hockey perspective.
1. The expansion of D1 hockey has created more competition. It might not be always at the top tier talent, but it impacts how the recruits flow.
2. Top level talent is far from a misnomer. Saying otherwise is ridiculous.
3. While there have been years that some of the better MN players went to other schools, including in-state and out-state, and even a guy like Tod Hartje who ended up at Harvard, we always got a share of top guys. While Hartje might have went to Harvard, we still recruited Randy Skarda, Peter Hankinson, Lance Pitlick. If we lost Berchild, but signed a couple of the other guys who went elsewhere I would not be writing this.
4. And, it may be a single one off year. Time will tell. But it is troubling to essentially completely strike out and denying that this should be a concern is putting your head in the ice.
That’s a bold strategy, Cotton.There’s a much greater chance the U has offered & he hasn’t decided to commit just yet.Yeah this one I don’t get. Either we’ve offered and he hasn’t committed yet or we haven’t offered yet, both of which are equally concerning.
Incorrect, he hasn’t been offered yet
That’s a bold strategy, Cotton.There’s a much greater chance the U has offered & he hasn’t decided to commit just yet.Yeah this one I don’t get. Either we’ve offered and he hasn’t committed yet or we haven’t offered yet, both of which are equally concerning.
Incorrect, he hasn’t been offered yet
if true, that’s a bit of a head scratcher with where the current recruits are at
I'm sorry, but not getting any big splashes during an early signing period one year is pretty silly to get worried about. If the normal signing period passes and there's nobody, then maybe start watching closely, but unless we get to the point of a recruiting class coming in with none of the top players, my worry -o-meter is pretty low.
B1G refs... corrupt, or just incompetent?
I'm sorry, but not getting any big splashes during an early signing period one year is pretty silly to get worried about. If the normal signing period passes and there's nobody, then maybe start watching closely, but unless we get to the point of a recruiting class coming in with none of the top players, my worry -o-meter is pretty low.
I agree. I focus at the present year 1st and then worry about the future when it comes. Bob has proven he can recruit and it is not like he is going to all of a sudden stop now.
I'm 50% factual and 50% sarcastic. When you get to know me, you will know which is which.
1. The expansion of D1 hockey has created more competition. It might not be always at the top tier talent, but it impacts how the recruits flow.
And much of the "expansion" in college hockey has been around for a few decades now so using that as any rationale in this discussion is largely nonsense. Let's not act like there is some recent boom in the number of programs that is causing a problem because that is not reality. If anything, the game of hockey (and the recruiting grounds) has expanded to the point where college programs can spend more time recruiting good talent in more areas than ever.
2. Top level talent is far from a misnomer. Saying otherwise is ridiculous.
Is it? Because the hype machine on "top level" recruits (whether ones that landed here or elsewhere) has been wrong plenty of times. The Gopher program alone has had plenty of instances where "top level talent" didn't pan out once it got to the college level. We're ultimately still talking about 16 year olds with a lot of development to go... Some of whom will not continue to progress quite as expected. Let's not act like we're discussing a bunch of Wayne Gretzkys and Sidney Crosbys here.
They ultimately still have a development process where some peak out and don't progress nearly as well as once was hoped.
But it is troubling to essentially completely strike out and denying that this should be a concern is putting your head in the ice.
It isn't troubling if you have seen this same situation play out in the past and seen the program win big in subsequent years. Especially when you are talking about ONE class of 16 year old kids who aren't even fully developed.
As I said, I can understand critiquing whether a coach is doing the job in recruiting. That's fair. But questioning the value/brand of the program itself? That's a stretch. The U has everything it needs to continue on as a top tier destination for the foreseeable future.
https://twitter.com/usahockeyntdp/status/1845219140463886528?s=46
would love a couple M’s next to the bottom set of wings.
Moe with a hat trick. I trust bobs recruiting but I’m not going to lie that I’ll be annoyed if we don’t get this commitment.
1. The expansion of D1 hockey has created more competition. It might not be always at the top tier talent, but it impacts how the recruits flow.
And much of the "expansion" in college hockey has been around for a few decades now so using that as any rationale in this discussion is largely nonsense. Let's not act like there is some recent boom in the number of programs that is causing a problem because that is not reality. If anything, the game of hockey (and the recruiting grounds) has expanded to the point where college programs can spend more time recruiting good talent in more areas than ever.
2. Top level talent is far from a misnomer. Saying otherwise is ridiculous.Is it? Because the hype machine on "top level" recruits (whether ones that landed here or elsewhere) has been wrong plenty of times. The Gopher program alone has had plenty of instances where "top level talent" didn't pan out once it got to the college level. We're ultimately still talking about 16 year olds with a lot of development to go... Some of whom will not continue to progress quite as expected. Let's not act like we're discussing a bunch of Wayne Gretzkys and Sidney Crosbys here.
They ultimately still have a development process where some peak out and don't progress nearly as well as once was hoped.
But it is troubling to essentially completely strike out and denying that this should be a concern is putting your head in the ice.It isn't troubling if you have seen this same situation play out in the past and seen the program win big in subsequent years. Especially when you are talking about ONE class of 16 year old kids who aren't even fully developed.
As I said, I can understand critiquing whether a coach is doing the job in recruiting. That's fair. But questioning the value/brand of the program itself? That's a stretch. The U has everything it needs to continue on as a top tier destination for the foreseeable future.
1. Few decades now? BS. Arizona St. having a reasonable hockey program is not a few decades old. There has been a major expansion of teams and where hockey prospects originate.
2. Again, BS. The fact that a small fraction of the elite prospects do not pan out does not mean there isn't a top level of talent in recruits. And it isn't hype. Everyone identifies it and the top level recruits are recruited by everyone.
3. And, it isn't development. The top level guys are one or two year players at best. Just look at Logan Cooley. Top level talent. No development needed to be a very effective player. One year, to the professional ranks.
4. Perhaps the U has enough brand value. But it clearly did not this recruiting season. The top talent went to Denver by passing their home state's program. That is troubling. If you don't think so, great. But any objective view looks at this as a troubling development in a collegiate athletic environment that is evolving with all of the factors I have mentioned.
Yeah idk, one recruiting cycle where the book hasn’t been closed isn’t necessarily indicative of a trend.
We've seen some of the elite programs benefit from the transfer portal. If North Dakota, who can never depend on home-grown talent in any season, can round out its roster by throwing out their bobber, there's no reason Minnesota can't do at least as well.
They got Wood this year, and I'm guessing there will be others next season who may want to jump at the chance to play for the Gophers. That's one benefit for teams like Minnesota, who aren't focused on the portal but can cash in if they must. A bad recruiting year might not turn out so bad after all.
Solomon of Champlin to Wisconsin per his instagram today...
1. Few decades now? BS. Arizona St. having a reasonable hockey program is not a few decades old. There has been a major expansion of teams and where hockey prospects originate.
There has been a "major expansion" from where prospects come from... but not in the number of college hockey programs. College hockey has generally hovered in its current range for programs for quite a while. It's not like we jumped from 60 total programs to 70 or 80 in a matter of two decades. Naming one program that hasn't really been a major success (and largely doesn't compete for the same kinds of recruits) doesn't make for a trend.
2. Again, BS. The fact that a small fraction of the elite prospects do not pan out does not mean there isn't a top level of talent in recruits. And it isn't hype. Everyone identifies it and the top level recruits are recruited by everyone.
Even full time professional scouting staffs who spend loads of hours watching prospects get it wrong. It's not really a "small fraction". We've seen that here and elsewhere. Go through some past drafts and you will see examples of first rounders that didn't amount to much. Pro staffs get it wrong... and college coaches aren't immune to this either. Especially considering they sometimes have to "commit" to a player much earlier in the development process.
3. And, it isn't development. The top level guys are one or two year players at best. Just look at Logan Cooley. Top level talent. No development needed to be a very effective player. One year, to the professional ranks.
I don't disagree that there are certainly successful situations where a guy is ready very quickly. But I also don't see anybody that's being discussed here that is a Logan Cooley/Adam Fantilli/Macklin Celebrini level player either. We'll see. Maybe it will turn into that for one or two of them. But let's not act like those types are commonplace examples either.
I think the difference is a couple decisions in one recruiting class is a rather brief window of time to judge and react so alarmist. The idea that a couple of decisions by a few kids should be rationale for questioning the bigger picture value of a program is an overreaction in my book.
The "program" (as an entity) has everything it needs to be among the best. Facilities, money, etc. However, I can totally understand if people want to debate whether the people running the program are making the most of their opportunities. At the end of the day, building relationships is a big part of the equation in recruiting.
Enjoy the season. Always good to have a healthy discussion.
Solomon of Champlin to Wisconsin per his instagram today...
He really seems to be ascending quickly.
Continued fomo as we wait for a new commitment…
Motzko’s best recruiting effort this year will need to be keeping current players another year, Kurth, Lamb, Wood, Moore, Rinzel etc.
Expected losses
Forwards: Huglen, Nevers, Snuggerud, 1 early departure.
Defense: Koster, 1 early departure (Rinzel/Chesley)
Goalie: Souliere
Potential class
Forward: LJ Mooney, Javon Moore, Teddy Townsend or Kvasnicka, 1 transfer or late commitment
Defense: Phillips, Grimes or Rombach
Goalie: Transfer??
@glenhogan21 I expect Wood is a probable departure, though crazier things have happened. He did hit Uconn's campus as a draft-eligible so he is on the younger side.
Mooney, Kvasnicka, Moore, Townsend feel like locks. Nevers and Reid could easily play another year of juniors. Katz is technically eligible though feels very unlikely.
Defense will be interesting. Rombach could be a high draft pick and after two years in the USHL should be ready to contribute. Phillips is massive, toolsy, and mean, though he has a lot of holes in his game. Numbers tight but plenty of time to sort out who is ready.
Expect a portal goalie to team with Airey.
Owen B transfers back to the Gophers to back up Airey? 🤔
This season 4 games played
2.50 GAA, .925 saves %
He was 5 and a half minutes away from leading a Lindenwood sweep over Wisconsin. A 4-2 win and a 3-2 OT loss which is a Pairwise series win (1.33 out of 2).
I’m expecting Snuggerud, Chesley, Rinzel, Moore and Wood to all leave early.
Although Faber helped set a precedent for players in this program to return for one more year which Snuggerud helped carry forward. Moore and Rinzel staying for their junior years would be huge.
After this season: Snuggy & Wood - yes; Chesley, Rinzel, Moore - no. Chesley isn’t a sure fire NHL level (future player) while Rinzel & Moore won’t (yet) be ready to step directly into an NHL line-upI’m expecting Snuggerud, Chesley, Rinzel, Moore and Wood to all leave early.
Although Faber helped set a precedent for players in this program to return for one more year which Snuggerud helped carry forward. Moore and Rinzel staying for their junior years would be huge.
Get Faber to convince Chesley and Rinzel to play one more year at the U and then step right into the Wild lineup.
@bearpaw28 agreed fully on Moore. He’s on the smaller side and needs to get more physically ready. Blackhawks kind of have a weird lineup with bedard and nazar already slotted in and Moore obviously being another small guy
After this season: Snuggy & Wood - yes; Chesley, Rinzel, Moore - no. Chesley isn’t a sure fire NHL level (future player) while Rinzel & Moore won’t (yet) be ready to step directly into an NHL line-upI’m expecting Snuggerud, Chesley, Rinzel, Moore and Wood to all leave early.
Although Faber helped set a precedent for players in this program to return for one more year which Snuggerud helped carry forward. Moore and Rinzel staying for their junior years would be huge.
I don’t disagree with your Chesley take but I still think he signs. Capitals are stretched thin on D and will be pounding the table for him. Plus his buddies Cooley and Snuggerud will be in the pros.
After this season: Snuggy & Wood - yes; Chesley, Rinzel, Moore - no. Chesley isn’t a sure fire NHL level (future player) while Rinzel & Moore won’t (yet) be ready to step directly into an NHL line-upI’m expecting Snuggerud, Chesley, Rinzel, Moore and Wood to all leave early.
Although Faber helped set a precedent for players in this program to return for one more year which Snuggerud helped carry forward. Moore and Rinzel staying for their junior years would be huge.
I don’t disagree with your Chesley take but I still think he signs. Capitals are stretched thin on D and will be pounding the table for him. Plus his buddies Cooley and Snuggerud will be in the pros.
he’s not even listed as one of their top D prospects. I think we see how steady he is at the college level, but I don’t think he’s a “plus” guy at anything at the pro level despite being a very very good player for us. I’d guess he’s back and the Caps spend some draft capital and spend to get some d men using their higher powered forwards as the youth movement to maximize the end of the Ovi years
Maybe they do because he’s older and they don’t want him to walk, but don’t it happening because he’s slotting into the nhl
Love Chesley as a Gopher, and happy he is on our team, but I’d be pretty surprised if he jumped right into an NHL lineup. Still makes some head-scratching decisions.