Current players vs. Future Players - best Power Five offers

[BigRedBuster]

1 minute ago, Warrior10 said:

You take the number of years their starting 5 has been in the program = 3.2yrs on average..

 

You take the number of years our starting 5 has been in the program = 3.2yrs on average. 

 

Guess I don't see much difference. 

You might need to take high school math over again.

[knapplc]

7 minutes ago, TGHusker said:

Knapp is it the actual line players or the line coach?   I thought some of those OL players were up and comers who were going to make a difference.

 

In their current form, both. Guys like Jaimes, Farniok, Raridon and Decker could be pretty good in the future, but they definitely need a better coach.

[teachercd]

I would love to see what Riley could do with 22 senior starters that all took a redshirt and were all 4 star ranked or higher.

 

[knapplc]

That sounds like a video game team.

[TGHusker]

1 minute ago, knapplc said:

 

In their current form, both. Guys like Jaimes, Farniok, Raridon and Decker could be pretty good in the future, but they definitely need a better coach.

I would agree. I actually anticipated they would  already be making a big impact.  Cav may end up being to MR what Cosgrove was to BC.   I do think an excellent OL coach could make a difference.  While we don't have great backs, I do think Tre Bryant could end up being a near great back if he runs behind a well coached line (and if he recovers from and has no more knee problems) - Oz and Wilborn also would be more effective. 

[BigRedBuster]

From a post on the previous page.

 

Wisconsin's O line experience:  31, 30, 26, 9, 4 starts

Nebraska's O line experience:  27, 16, 9, 2, 2 starts

[Warrior10]

5 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

You might need to take high school math over again.

How so? The two deep for each is as follows:

 

Neb:

1 RsSr - 5 total yrs in program.

4 RsJr - 16 total yrs in program.

2 RsSo - 6 total yrs in program.

2 RsFr - 4 total yrs in program.

1 TrFr - 1 total yr in program.

Combine those and you get 32 combined years in the program. Divide 32 by 10 players and that's an average of 3.2yrs.

 

Wisc:

4 RsJr - 16 total yrs in program.

3 RsSo - 9 total yrs in program.

3 RsFr - 6 total yrs in program. 

Combine those and you get 31 combined years in the program. Divide 31 by 10 players and that's an average of 3.1yrs.

 

Where do you disagree?

 

[BigRedBuster]

8 minutes ago, Warrior10 said:

How so? The two deep for each is as follows:

 

Neb:

1 RsSr - 5 total yrs in program.

4 RsJr - 16 total yrs in program.

2 RsSo - 6 total yrs in program.

2 RsFr - 4 total yrs in program.

1 TrFr - 1 total yr in program.

Combine those and you get 32 combined years in the program. Divide 32 by 10 players and that's an average of 3.2yrs.

 

Wisc:

4 RsJr - 16 total yrs in program.

3 RsSo - 9 total yrs in program.

3 RsFr - 6 total yrs in program. 

Combine those and you get 31 combined years in the program. Divide 31 by 10 players and that's an average of 3.1yrs.

 

Where do you disagree?

 

 

First of all, your first calculation was on starting 5 (as stated yourself in your post)....not the entire 2 deep.

 

So...looking at the starters, as I've listed above, Wisconsin's starting 5 have 16 years in the program.  That does come up to 3.2 average years experience.

 

However, Nebraska's starting 5 have only 12 years in the program.  That comes to 2.4 average years experience.

 

 

[Warrior10]

1 minute ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

First of all, your first calculation was on starting 5 (as stated yourself in your post)....not the entire 2 deep.

 

So...looking at the starters, as I've listed above, Wisconsin's starting 5 have 16 years in the program.  That does come up to 3.2 average of years experience.

 

However, Nebraska's starting 5 have only 12 years in the program.  That comes to 2.4 average of years experience.

 

 

When specifically looking at starters you are correct, Wisc moves up to 3.2 and ties us....as I stated earlier. You are off on ours. 

 

Neb starters:

3 RsJr - 12 total yrs in program.

1 RsSo - 3 total yrs in program.

1 TrFr - 1 total yr in program.

Add those up and you get 16 combined years, or 3.2 on average. 

[BigRedBuster]

8 minutes ago, Warrior10 said:

When specifically looking at starters you are correct, Wisc moves up to 3.2 and ties us....as I stated earlier. You are off on ours. 

 

Neb starters:

3 RsJr - 12 total yrs in program.

1 RsSo - 3 total yrs in program.

1 TrFr - 1 total yr in program.

Add those up and you get 16 combined years, or 3.2 on average. 

I was thrown off by how they were listed.  Wisconsin lists their RS juniors on their two deep as actual RSJRs.  Nebraska only lists them as a Junior.  So, I stand corrected on the average number of years in the program.

 

However, it's clear by the number of starts that their line is much more experienced in game time experience.

 

Wish - 100 starts

Neb - 56 starts

[Warrior10]

4 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

I was thrown off by how they were listed.  Wisconsin lists their RS juniors on their two deep as actual RSJRs.  Nebraska only lists them as a Junior.  So, I stand corrected on the average number of years in the program.

 

However, it's clear by the number of starts that their line is much more experienced in game time experience.

 

Wish - 100 starts

Neb - 56 starts

Ah gotcha. I'd agree that they have more in game experience, although your initial post credited their RB being surrounded with upperclassmen for his success. 

 

Unfortunately I think this more points to the opinion, shared by me and others, that even though our players have been in the program just as long as Wisc they appeared to have been developed much better and maybe quicker. Which is a testament to Cav's inability to get players to play at the level needed. 

[Mavric]

16 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

I was thrown off by how they were listed.  Wisconsin lists their RS juniors on their two deep as actual RSJRs.  Nebraska only lists them as a Junior.  So, I stand corrected on the average number of years in the program.

 

However, it's clear by the number of starts that their line is much more experienced in game time experience.

 

Wish - 100 starts

Neb - 56 starts

 

And if they have that many more starts with the same number of years in the program, what does that tell you about whether or not they were starting in previous years - when they had less time in the program?

[BigRedBuster]

1 hour ago, Warrior10 said:

Ah gotcha. I'd agree that they have more in game experience, although your initial post credited their RB being surrounded with upperclassmen for his success. 

 

Unfortunately I think this more points to the opinion, shared by me and others, that even though our players have been in the program just as long as Wisc they appeared to have been developed much better and maybe quicker. Which is a testament to Cav's inability to get players to play at the level needed. 

I hold the same belief. 

[huskerfan69]

riley took over a 9 win team. he didn't start from scratch.

 

he's had more than enough talent to take care of illinois, northern illinois, and '15 purdue 

 

every coach would do better with upgraded talent, but you have to get the most out of the talent you currently have. riley is clearly not doing that right now.

 

[Mavric]

On 10/10/2017 at 2:27 PM, knapplc said:

I'd like someone with some actual experience with recruiting to tell me (us) if this is accurate. Found this on the interwebs today and I don't know what to believe.

 

 

Finally got home where I can look into this.

 

First of all, offers are about the least scientific way to compare players for a number of reasons.  First, there's no way to verify that player actually has an offer.  Second, they may have an "offer" but it's not actually a committable offer.  Third, players may or may not announce all their offers, especially if they commit early or are local kids.

 

Second, before even looking, this list is dripping with trying to force a narrative.  As you noted, why is there only one listed for current players but three for the Futures?  Second, are we judging based on how good a certain team is now or 3-4 years ago when these guys were being recruited.

 

Third, as you also noted, why is he including guys who may or may not ever enroll.

 

Fourth, why didn't he list all starting positions?  Why are Rahn and Reimers on the list but not Spielman and Lindsey?  No Newby at LB but Davis listed? Three corners but none of them is Jackson?  No Davis twins?  Does Missouri being their best offer mean the guys coming behind them are going to be better?

 

But here are a few of the Current players that I think he shorted, probably intentionally, either in who their offers were or by not listing them at all:

Morgan - Clemson, Ohio State, Florida

Lindsey - Ohio State, Alabama, Oklahoma

DPE - North Carolina, West Virginia, Wake Forest

JD Spielman - Michigan, Florida State, UCLA

Foster - Georgia, Iowa, UCLA

Farniok - Florida State, Michigan, Oklahoma

Knevel - Alabama, Wisconsin, West Virginia

Jaimes - TCU, Cal, Texas

Akinmoladun - Iowa, Arkansas, Missouri

Carlos Daivs - Missouri, North Carolina, Arizona State

Khalil Davis - Arizona State, Kansas State, Missouri

Newby - Oklahoma, Penn State, Virginia Tech

Young - Washington, UCLA, Arizona

Gifford - Iowa State

Jackson - Michigan, Oklahoma, USC

Aaron Williams - Mississippi, Mississippi State, Kansas State