Walk on program is failing?

[Kiyoat Husker]

http://journalstar.com/sports/huskers/life-in-the-red/rimington-expands-thoughts-on-walk-on-program-in-radio-interview/article_55916bf4-ca3f-53a6-a266-b420293861cd.html

 

Rimington gives a more fleshed-out explanation of his walk-on program comments.  Also some quotes from HCMR in the article.

Quote

 

“Everybody thinks they know the walk-on program because we’ve got three or four walk-ons, but back in my day, back in the day, we had a whole team of walk-ons,” Rimington said, while recognizing that the landscape has changed.

 

“There’s a lot of kids in this state that can play ball, there really is, and we just need to give them a chance," he added. "If not a scholarship, how about a preferred walk-on? I know the numbers are tight. … If we didn’t have these walk-ons, where would we be in our depth? We’ve got to be realistic. Our advantage at Nebraska is that we have people who will pay to come and play because they love the university and will sacrifice and forego a scholarship somewhere else because they want to touch that field and go out there and play.”

 

 

To me he sounds slightly more out-of-touch to the current CFB landscape than many would give him credit for IMO.

 

 

[BIG ERN]

On 9/29/2017 at 10:23 AM, brophog said:

 

That whole graduate transfer thing is a loophole that needs fixed, or make other player transfers easier. There is an argument birth ways, I suppose, but it's not a congruent philosophy as it stands by the NCAA.

 

I'm a big fan of JUCOs, not a lot because you can easily overdo it and create class size imbalances, but we have some really good programs in the area. Especially athlete type players because even if they don't break into the depth chart in their limited amount of eligibility they can still play special teams and keep your talented 2 deep guys from having to play there. It's one of those things where if you do it smartly, you can get big dividends.

Dave has been out of the game for a long time and doesn't understand how the walk-on program will never be the same again. With that said, I am all for adding in Jucos and Grad Transfers and this staff will not do that. Bill Snyder has made a killing from Jucos - and we have seen a lot of good talent work out for us this way as well. 

[Husker in WI]

I agree he seems out of touch - we offer a ton of preferred walk-on spots, and have as many walk-ons as anyone. The in-state guys we don't get here either A) have a scholarship offer to other FBS schools, or B) prefer to take a lower level scholarship. I don't follow it incredibly closely, but who are the guys we're missing that would be walk-ons if offered the chance? I think he started off saying something about walk-ons being important which is true, and now he's just stuck talking about it. We pretty much do have a whole team of walk-ons, 50 is a lot. More walk-ons won't make this team better - we might get another starter or two, but there's a point of diminishing returns.

 

It kind of sucks that some of the walk-ons don't get much or any time with coaches outside their position group, but it's a big team. The HC/OC/DC aren't going to be super focused on specific players until they've shown they can make an impact. It's a harder route to being a difference maker - the coaches are already invested in scholarship guys, as a walk-on you have to make them invested in you. Maybe TO was better about making the walk-ons feel important, but I doubt the overall view was different. The coordinators/head coach will notice when your position coach tells them you should be contributing. Walk-ons as a group are important. A single walk-on isn't until he proves it, as harsh as that sounds.

[Xmas32]

17 minutes ago, BIG ERN said:

Dave has been out of the game for a long time and doesn't understand how the walk-on program will never be the same again. With that said, I am all for adding in Jucos and Grad Transfers and this staff will not do that. Bill Snyder has made a killing from Jucos - and we have seen a lot of good talent work out for us this way as well. 

 

Couldn't agree more.  This is one thing that I'm surprised Nebraska doesn't take advantage of more.  There are quite a few powerhouse JUCOs in Kansas that in theory Nebraska could target to help offset either recruiting misses or help bolster numbers.  I know geography doesn't matter as much to JUCOs because the guys come from all over but dang, Kansas is still pretty close.

[knapplc]

Wait a second. Dave Rimington doesn't understand the current nature of the walk-on situation, but some guys on message boards do?

 

What planet do you guys live on that this is a reality for you?  You realize that Dave Rimington has the internet, right? And that he has access to free websites like HuskerBoard, right? And that he could learn all about the nature of the walk-on climate by reading those message boards, right?  And that on top of all that, he has access to a big-time college football program, its coaches, and all the information they have available, right?  And that he could talk to dozens of other coaches from dozens of other programs who are currently running walk-on programs of their own because he likely knows them personally through his NFL days or from his work with the Boomer Esiason Foundation, right?

 

Think about what you're saying. 

[Kiyoat Husker]

11 minutes ago, Husker in WI said:

It kind of sucks that some of the walk-ons don't get much or any time with coaches outside their position group, but it's a big team. The HC/OC/DC aren't going to be super focused on specific players until they've shown they can make an impact.

 

Weren't there fewer restrictions on the number of paid or volunteer coaches "back in the day" as well?

[StPaulHusker]

3 minutes ago, knapplc said:

Wait a second. Dave Rimington doesn't understand the current nature of the walk-on situation, but some guys on message boards do?

 

What planet do you guys live on that this is a reality for you?  You realize that Dave Rimington has the internet, right? And that he has access to free websites like HuskerBoard, right? And that he could learn all about the nature of the walk-on climate by reading those message boards, right?  And that on top of all that, he has access to a big-time college football program, its coaches, and all the information they have available, right?  And that he could talk to dozens of other coaches from dozens of other programs who are currently running walk-on programs of their own because he likely knows them personally through his NFL days or from his work with the Boomer Esiason Foundation, right?

 

Think about what you're saying. 

I mean.  He openly admitted that he hadn't been following the program too closely.  Right?

So some guys on message boards don't know as much about walk ons as Rimington but yet he uses free message boards to access information about said walk ons?

 

We had 5 or 6 players starting game 1 that were walk ons.  What is he using for criteria that the walk on program isn't strong?

 

 

[knapplc]

5 minutes ago, StPaulHusker said:

So some guys on message boards don't know as much about walk ons as Rimington but yet he uses free message boards to access information about said walk ons?

 

 

I didn't say he did, I said he could, meaning the information available to him is at least to the level of the people saying he doesn't understand the nature of walk-ons today.

[StPaulHusker]

1 minute ago, knapplc said:

 

 

I didn't say he did, I said he could, meaning the information available to him is at least to the level of the people saying he doesn't understand the nature of walk-ons today.

Again.  He openly admitted he hadn't been following the program closely but knows for sure the walk on program needs improvement?

[StPaulHusker]

Nebraska was not great because of walk ons. Our walk ons were good because we had a great program.

[knapplc]

4 minutes ago, StPaulHusker said:

Again.  He openly admitted he hadn't been following the program closely but knows for sure the walk on program needs improvement?

 

How long does he need to get caught up on the walk-on program? A day? Two?

[StPaulHusker]

Just now, knapplc said:

 

How long does he need to get caught up on the walk-on program? A day? Two?

I don't know.  I don't see how a guy on a message board would know

[knapplc]

Exactly.

[Kiyoat Husker]

Here's an old Sports Illustrated article about Nebraska's Walk-on program from Sept 5, 1984!  Long article, but worth the read.

 

https://www.si.com/vault/1984/09/05/633947/walk-ons-are-now-in-the-running

 

One line caught my eye specifically:

 

Quote

Many coaches don't pursue walk-ons because of a built-in problem—high tuition. A school like, say, Duke might be expected to have a lot of walk-ons, academic types who stumbled onto the practice field one day while looking for the chem lab. But only four of Duke's 98 players last season were walk-ons, largely because of the school's $12,000 annual tab. Walk-ons may enjoy punishment more than most, but they're not necessarily monetary masochists.

 

If tuition was a deterrent to walking on for some players back in 1984, how do you think it factors in today, with tuition prices skyrocketing nationally?

 

[soup]

The more Rimington speaks the more concern I have.  He seriously believes we need more walkons.  No, we don't, we have plenty.  

 

We need a system that is in place for more than 4 years.  Even when Bo was here he never had an offensive system in place for more than 4 years.  I could make the argument his defensive system changed also.

 

The reason all of the great teams are great, is because of consistency.  Nobody brings up the elephant in the room when talking about Nebraska of the 80s and 90s.  They changed their offensive identity...never, and their defensive identity....once.  Over the course of 20 years.  That is how you build championship teams.  That's when the 50 plus walkons that Rimington wants start to make a big difference because they were running the same offense and defense that Nebraska ran in High school.  They could step right in and make a difference.