Brinkman to Gophers

[green4]

So, JMHO, Edina has nothing to do with why the Gophers have stunk, unless it is because the gophs don't have enough Edina kids.

That said, if you were a Gopher fan, the recent losses in the Tourney to Union - and Yale - were obviously very disappointing. You would have thought the Gophers were better than those two teams, and should have won. But there is little doubt that fans of several other teams, like UND for example, can point to similar disappointments along their road to a NCAA Championship Trophy.

I thought I made it clear that I was a pretty casual gopher fan. The whole reason I started talking about this subject was because somebody wanted to toss Edina in as one of the reasons as to why the gophs were struggling. I knew enough that that claim made very little sense so I pointed it out. I have a pretty small desire to talk about the actual gopher team so, yeah. I really don't watch them enough to discuss them accurately. Sorry you were upset by the word choice I used, but I was just trying to point out Edina has had very little to do with the Gophers in the past however many years.

[Sats81]

The entire recruiting process/system of kids committing before they have a drivers license is a mess. Not real sure what the long term solution is, but clearly something has to change.

[terrymoore1717]

Its like Bones said-"you can't deny the laws of physics". As long as colleges can verbally commit, there will be a race to get the best players at younger ages.

Coach Lucia has to get the best players in Minnesota. If he does not grab them at age 15 or 16 (following 15 Nat Camp) someone else will.

Walker, Phillips and Brinkman are all great players now and likely to be outstanding college players. But injuries and other stuff happens to players between 15 Nat Camp and freshman year, so there is no sure bet.

The only sure thing is that the top guys will all choose schools before they turn 17, so you better grab the best bets and hope. It usually works out, but not always. These three are as solid a bet as any to help the Gophers in 2019-20.

One easy change to the system would be to eliminate verbal commitments, which are really no commitment at all. Make both sides actually commit to a scholarship amount and entry year. If the player does not come in that year, his scholarship still counts against the limit. In turn, players lose a year of eligibility if they de-commit (maybe not if coaching change). This would create more to lose on both sides, which might delay their willingness to make the commitment so early.

[4on5again]

The entire recruiting process/system of kids committing before they have a drivers license is a mess. Not real sure what the long term solution is, but clearly something has to change.

The KID saying "I can't take it anymore," says it all.

I was well recruited in another sport as a junior in high school, and I felt unsure with just one year to go in prep sports. I can't imagine who influences you at 14 or 15, to make a decision 3 years in advance.

Remember the parents are in control, or should be. I notice that some have waited to commit, which seems like a good way to go. You can assess the schools as you should.

[warriors41]

But no titles.... which is kind of my point.

It's not quite so easy... especially in a "one and done" tournament in which a hot goalie can steal a game against a superior opponent. Yes, it is the ultimate goal but it isn't like these teams go through Best of 5 or Best of 7 series to get the title (there would be far less "underdogs" winning if it was that way).

So what you're saying is that the next rule change the B1G is going to push for is changing the frozen four to a beat of 3 series

[mulefarm]

The entire recruiting process/system of kids committing before they have a drivers license is a mess. Not real sure what the long term solution is, but clearly something has to change.

So true!!!

[edgeless2]

The entire recruiting process/system of kids committing before they have a drivers license is a mess. Not real sure what the long term solution is, but clearly something has to change.

So true!!!

This is the entire point of this conversation. The early recruiters don't want to be stuck playing the late bloomers for a chip in the frozen four, so let's swing the pendulum our way. If anyone can dispute that I'd love to hear it.

[DrGaf]

The entire recruiting process/system of kids committing before they have a drivers license is a mess. Not real sure what the long term solution is, but clearly something has to change.

So true!!!

This is the entire point of this conversation. The early recruiters don't want to be stuck playing the late bloomers for a chip in the frozen four, so let's swing the pendulum our way. If anyone can dispute that I'd love to hear it.

This is it.

-Huey Lewis

[FadedRedLine]

Its like Bones said-"you can't deny the laws of physics". As long as colleges can verbally commit, there will be a race to get the best players at younger ages.

Coach Lucia has to get the best players in Minnesota. If he does not grab them at age 15 or 16 (following 15 Nat Camp) someone else will.

Walker, Phillips and Brinkman are all great players now and likely to be outstanding college players. But injuries and other stuff happens to players between 15 Nat Camp and freshman year, so there is no sure bet.

The only sure thing is that the top guys will all choose schools before they turn 17, so you better grab the best bets and hope. It usually works out, but not always. These three are as solid a bet as any to help the Gophers in 2019-20.

One easy change to the system would be to eliminate verbal commitments, which are really no commitment at all. Make both sides actually commit to a scholarship amount and entry year. If the player does not come in that year, his scholarship still counts against the limit. In turn, players lose a year of eligibility if they de-commit (maybe not if coaching change). This would create more to lose on both sides, which might delay their willingness to make the commitment so early.

I agree with the idea of eliminating Verbals.

[MNHockeyFan]

I agree with the idea of eliminating Verbals.

Since verbals are non-binding for either party wouldn't any attempt to eliminate them become a free speech issue? Would a prospective student athlete never be allowed to declare his or her preference for a certain school? How would such a ban ever be enforceable?

[DrGaf]

I agree with the idea of eliminating Verbals.

Since verbals are non-binding for either party wouldn't any attempt to eliminate them become a free speech issue? Would a prospective student athlete never be allowed to declare his or her preference for a certain school? How would such a ban ever be enforceable?

May as well bring Hitler into the conversation now too.

If we eliminate verbal commitments, the next obvious step is Hitler.

[yesiplayedhockey]

I think the issue is you have the NCAA (and to some extent Big 10) involved. The NCAA makes almost all their decisions based on what's best for Football and Basketball. I don't see them wanting to spend much time focusing on what's right for our hockey community. All they care about is money.

I agree eliminating the verbal is a great solution. Sign whenever you want but you're not allowed to change unless there is a change in the head coach. Of course there's always that risk that the Blue Line club gets together and tries to run a head coach out to get a top kid to switch.

What I do hope is these parents are allowing their kids to visit 4,5,6 schools before signing. It's an experience they will never have again and for many an eye opener. I get it if it little Billy always wanted to be a gopher but that doesn't mean Billy and family shouldn't load up the Range Rover and visit other schools if nothing else for the experience.

[terrymoore1717]

Mn_H_Fan:

Currently, players do not sign their Letter of Intent until the year before they go to school. They could remove that requirement to permit a player to sign an LOI at any time with the entry year designated. Thus, the end of the recruiting barrage would be signing the LOI, not making a soft "verbal".

This would spell the end of the "gentlemen's agreement" to not recruit verbal commits, because the end of the early chase would be a signed LOI, that would carry certain other obligations as well. If the commitment is broken, the school would lose the scholly for a year or the player would lose a year of eligibiility.

If both sides have something to lose, they may be more hesitant to commit so early.

[MNHockeyFan]

Mn_H_Fan:

Currently, players do not sign their Letter of Intent until the year before they go to school. They could remove that requirement to permit a player to sign an LOI at any time with the entry year designated. Thus, the end of the recruiting barrage would be signing the LOI, not making a soft "verbal".

This would spell the end of the "gentlemen's agreement" to not recruit verbal commits, because the end of the early chase would be a signed LOI, that would carry certain other obligations as well. If the commitment is broken, the school would lose the scholly for a year or the player would lose a year of eligibiility.

If both sides have something to lose, they may be more hesitant to commit so early.

Thanks for the additional information. I like it. Now the big question is, does it make too much sense to be adopted?