Jump to content


Current players vs. Future Players - best Power Five offers


knapplc

Recommended Posts



If nothing else this does show at least there is talent coming in. I’m still of them mind that Riley should be done IF we have someone lined up to replace him. I fear that if we fire him and have no one lined up, it’s going to be a potentially rough search. At least if he is retained for another year, we have a good class coming in and can spend some real time looking for his replacement 

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
10 minutes ago, HuskerJax said:

If nothing else this does show at least there is talent coming in. I’m still of them mind that Riley should be done IF we have someone lined up to replace him. I fear that if we fire him and have no one lined up, it’s going to be a potentially rough search. At least if he is retained for another year, we have a good class coming in and can spend some real time looking for his replacement 

 

Name me a program that doesn't have talent coming in. 

 

Hooke was a high level recruiter at Michigan but his coaching sucked. 

 

USC always recruited elite talent before Pete Carroll was hired. 

 

1996 John Robinson 6–6 3–5 T-5th      
1997 John Robinson 6–5 4–4 T-5th      
1998 Paul Hackett 8–5 5–3 T-3rd L Sun    
1999 Paul Hackett 6–6 3–5 T-6th      
2000 Paul Hackett 5–7 2–6 T-8th      
2001 Pete Carroll 6–6

 

Pete won the Orange Bowl in his second season. Why? Coaching. 

 

This graph popped up on Twitter today with a clear agenda. The person two tweeted this out is a clear Riley supporter based on his Twitter history. 

 

If Riley continues to lose, and he will, he will be fired. This is Riley's 3rd year. That means players he has recruited should already be getting developed and becoming starters. When the OP is listing players that have not signed, there is an agenda. 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Isle of View said:

Not if our five had several years with the Wisconsin staff and their five had several years with our staff.

 

According to 24/7, here's what Wisconsin started on the O-line:

 

Biadasz 3* .8405

Dietzen 3* .8898

Edwards 3* .8600

Deiter 3* .8328

Benzschawel 3* .8144

 

Nebraska started:

Jaimes 3* .8797

Decker 3* .8543

Farmer 4* .9021

Gates 4* .8929

Foster 3* .8874

 

That stat right there is about all you need to show this staff can’t develop. Raw talent and no development doesn’t lead to winning the west, or the MAC in our case. 

  • Plus1 3
Link to comment

I asked the creator of this list some questions on the twitter. He stands behind his product. His arguments were uncompelling, even with his buddy's help.

 

YlTDCq0.png

 

So I threw Mav's average star ratings at him and he didn't flinch.  He's off, but he didn't flinch.

 

fWekq9A.png

 

And the last tweet is basically the reason this list is put together.  But it still doesn't make much sense - until you see like everyone else has, that the OP is a Riley guy.

 

6IFXanI.png

  • Plus1 7
Link to comment
2 hours ago, Isle of View said:

Not if our five had several years with the Wisconsin staff and their five had several years with our staff.

 

According to 24/7, here's what Wisconsin started on the O-line:

 

Biadasz 3* .8405

Dietzen 3* .8898

Edwards 3* .8600

Deiter 3* .8328

Benzschawel 3* .8144

 

Nebraska started:

Jaimes 3* .8797

Decker 3* .8543

Farmer 4* .9021

Gates 4* .8929

Foster 3* .8874


This is why you have to have a vision, identity, and recruit hard working intrinsically motivated guys.

 

I don't believe NU has a whole lot of those dudes. College football is full of emotion. Completely opposite of the NFL business model. Guys need to be excited to play football. This staff doesn't excite.

 

It's been hammered out like crazy on this board but, I don't see a sincere love/pride for Nebraska football from football players. That's something that's going to have to be built again but with the right coach. Mike Riley isn't that coach....Scott Frost is.

  • Plus1 4
Link to comment
4 hours ago, Branno said:

 

I've been noticing the straight-ahead runs more and more. We'll run to the outside and get a ton of yards, but then the next 3-4 run plays are all straight up the middle into a stacked box. It's like Langs is running the ball because he's being told to, and wants to get fewer yards so he can call more passing plays. I don't believe that's what he's doing, but there has to be a reason for it.

That’s exactly what it seems like to me as well. Zig was making some pretty big chunks very early in the Wiscy game heading right for the corners. Apparently that was working too well because Lang’s then started having him run right up our center and guards a$$. I guess that’s how you get to your preferred 2nd or 3rd and long situation so you can have Tanner air it out......and the defense knows exactly what we’re going to do. I know it can’t be but it really seems like the coaches try to make the running game fail.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...