Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Huskers44

Lack of talent

Recommended Posts

teachercd    2,769
2 minutes ago, Nebfanatic said:

It's been said the difference between recruiting 50th and 20th isn't as big of a difference as 19th to 1st is. 

Yeah, there is some truth to that...

 

2 minutes ago, Isle of View said:

 

He's not a great coach.  But he ran the Alvaraska blueprint.  A trained monkey probably could win 9 games at Wisconsin with Alvarez as AD.

No...that is only possible at NU...ooopppps

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NUinID    642
1 minute ago, StPaulHusker said:

No

 

Wow, really I think Wisconsin has a great shot of winning the B1G this year, and if they do they will be in the playoffs.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QMany    2,889
12 hours ago, Huskers44 said:

I’m going to say this, my opinion is Nebraska lacks talent. Their best player last season couldn’t make an NFL practice squad. Who on this team is an elite difference maker that you can rely on? We have no one. Look at years past we had Abdullah, David, Amukamara, Dennard, Compton, Helu, Suh, heck even Martinez. This team lacks talent so much. Maybe our young guys might be a great player, but right now I think we are far from coaching. (Even though I think this staff isn’t great by any means) could Coach Bo win with these players?

Lastly, is Nebraska getting worse, or is the rest of the conference just getting better? Or both? I think the conference is definitely getting better. 

 

Those guys were developed, coached, improved. 

 

Roy Helu Jr. 3* (0.8385) We have 4 RB that were higher rated recruits: Ozigbo (0.8559), Bryant (0.8638), Wilbon (0.8822), and Taylor (0.9058).

Ameer Abdullah 3* (0.8653) We have 2 RB that were higher rated recruits: Wilbon (0.8822), and Taylor (0.9058). Bryant close (0.8638).

(Previously: Terrell Newby 0.9404 and Imani Cross 0.9093)

 

Prince Amukamara 3* (0.8653) We have 3 DB that were higher rated recruits: Anderson (0.8935), Lee (0.9414), and Jackson (0.9582). Butler close (0.8650).
Alphonso Dennard 3* (0.8733) We have 3 DB that were higher rated recruits: Anderson (0.8935), Lee (0.9414), and Jackson (0.9582).

(Previously: Jackson 0.9606) 

 

Taylor Martinez 3* (0.8670) We have 2 QB that were higher rated recruits: O'Brien (0.9819), and Gebbia (0.9217). We're starting Lee (0.7985).

(Previously: Tommy Armstrong 0.9060)

 

Will Compton 4* (0.8917) We have 2 LB that were higher rated recruits: Newby (0.8941), and Roberts (0.9248). 

(Previously: Rose 0.9032)

 

Ndamukong Suh 4* (0.9797) Okay, he was an elite recruit. We don't have anyone on the team like him. And he far exceeded expectations.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
StPaulHusker    4,518
2 minutes ago, NUinID said:

 

Wow, really I think Wisconsin has a great shot of winning the B1G this year, and if they do they will be in the playoffs.   

If they do, then they would be great.  But until then I stand by my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NUinID    642
9 minutes ago, StPaulHusker said:

If they do, then they would be great.  But until then I stand by my opinion.

 

Who do you see them losing to in the regular season?  The only game they have left that they might not be favored in is against Michigan and that is at home.  They even get Iowa at home this year.  Once the get to the CCG they have just a good a chance of winning as anyone else.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
StPaulHusker    4,518
5 minutes ago, NUinID said:

 

Who do you see them losing to in the regular season?  The only game they have left that they might not be favored in is against Michigan and that is at home.  They even get Iowa at home this year.  Once the get to the CCG they have just a good a chance of winning as anyone else.  

Ok

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
StPaulHusker    4,518
1 minute ago, NUinID said:

 

Well that's not really much of an answer.  

How am I supposed to know who they will lose to.  Last year they lost 3.  The year before they lost to Iowa and NW at Camp Randall.

 

In fact they haven't lost fewer than 3 games since 2010.  To me they aren't in great status.  But few teams are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Frustrated    53
41 minutes ago, StPaulHusker said:

How am I supposed to know who they will lose to.  Last year they lost 3.  The year before they lost to Iowa and NW at Camp Randall.

 

In fact they haven't lost fewer than 3 games since 2010.  To me they aren't in great status.  But few teams are.

That may be true, but they have played in the CCG 4 times since 2011 and won it twice.  IN other words, out of the six CCGs so far, they have played in 2/3 of them.  That's more than any other school.  They also scheduled Alabama and LSU in Non-Con during that span.  Several of their past assistants are HC somewhere else.  Did you see the stat during the game last Sat. that their record over the last 5 years was 4th best in the nation?

 

Our program and their program are worlds apart.

 

Don't forget in 2012 they played us in the CCG after finishing 3rd in their division and, well...we all know how that turned out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
StPaulHusker    4,518
1 minute ago, Frustrated said:

That may be true, but they have played in the CCG 4 times since 2011 and won it twice.  IN other words, out of the six CCGs so far, they have played in 2/3 of them.  That's more than any other school.  They also scheduled Alabama and LSU in Non-Con during that span.  Several of their past assistants are HC somewhere else.  Did you see the stat during the game last Sat. that their record over the last 5 years was 4th best in the nation?

 

Our program and their program are worlds apart.

 

Don't forget in 2012 they played us in the CCG after finishing 3rd in their division and, well...we all know how that turned out.

 

I fail to see why I have to call them great.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Frustrated    53
Just now, StPaulHusker said:

 

I fail to see why I have to call them great.  

I don't think anyone suggested that you do.  I was merely pointing out that they have had quite a bit of success lately and seem to find themselves in the rankings as a result.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
StPaulHusker    4,518
Just now, Frustrated said:

I don't think anyone suggested that you do.  I was merely pointing out that they have had quite a bit of success lately and seem to find themselves in the rankings as a result.

They sure have.  But I never denied that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
knapplc    17,788
4 minutes ago, StPaulHusker said:

 

I fail to see why I have to call them great.  

 

All the cool kids are doing it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NUinID    642
1 minute ago, StPaulHusker said:

 

I fail to see why I have to call them great.  

 

Fair enough, who in your eyes is a great football team this year?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Frustrated    53
1 minute ago, StPaulHusker said:

They sure have.  But I never denied that.

In order for Nebraska to be a great team, would you agree that they must first win the West, then win the B1G?  That really is my point.  Wisconsin hasn't gone to the next level, yet, and may never do so.  But struggling to make a bowl game, or considering whether Nebraska can maybe sneak into one with 5 wins based on APR is a far cry from great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
StPaulHusker    4,518
3 minutes ago, NUinID said:

 

Fair enough, who in your eyes is a great football team this year?

Probably the top 3 teams in the polls.  Maybe just the top 2.  They have sustained it over several years.

 

 

2 minutes ago, Frustrated said:

In order for Nebraska to be a great team, would you agree that they must first win the West, then win the B1G?  That really is my point.  Wisconsin hasn't gone to the next level, yet, and may never do so.  But struggling to make a bowl game, or considering whether Nebraska can maybe sneak into one with 5 wins based on APR is a far cry from great.

Yes.  The path to greatness definitely requires winning your division and then the conference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Frustrated    53
5 minutes ago, StPaulHusker said:

Probably the top 3 teams in the polls.  Maybe just the top 2.  They have sustained it over several years.

 

 

Yes.  The path to greatness definitely requires winning your division and then the conference.

Well then, now we get to the real question, once a team is on the path (in this example, playing in 4 of 6 CCGs), how much further must they go to be considered great?  does making the playoff satisfy that?  What if they lose the semifinal?  Is it winning a semifinal even if the team loses the NC?  Does it require winning the NC?  Are they great if they win the NC but don't win their division the following year?  How much success and what kind makes a team great?

 

Does missing the playoff and winning one of the NY6 bowls count for anything?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
StPaulHusker    4,518
Just now, Frustrated said:

Well then, now we get to the real question, once a team is on the path (in this example, playing in 4 of 6 CCGs), how much further must they go to be considered great?  does making the playoff satisfy that?  What if they lose the semifinal?  Is it winning a semifinal even if the team loses the NC?  Does it require winning the NC?  Are they great if they win the NC but don't win their division the following year?  How much success and what kind makes a team great?

 

Does missing the playoff and winning one of the NY6 bowls count for anything?

I think a team needs to win their division, conference, and probably be in the argument for a National Championship over the course of several years to be considered great, in my opinion.

 

Everyone is going to have their own standards.  But Wisconsin has never been mentioned for national titles.  No one has ever argued that they should have been in ahead of someone else.

 

A 70-80% win percentage isn't what it used to be so greatness has to be elevated as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
soup    132

Until Nebraska runs the same offense for more than 4 years, and the same defense for more than 4 years they will never be a great team.

 

Everyone keeps bringing up Wisconsin, but they have run the same system for years now on both sides of the ball, and yes they have switched coaches and assistants.  But guess what they still run the same thing because it works.  It is a run-heavy pro system on offense and a 3-4 on defense.  (not too far off of what Riley is trying to do.  yes, we have thrown a lot this year, but that is what happens when you get behind and are trying to play catch up.  That's life)

 

all of the "great" teams have one thing in common.  Some sort of consistency in the system on both sides of the ball, or if there was a change it was to only one side of the ball, and it wasn't a wholesale change.

 

 

And until fans have some patience with a coach (any coach) this is never going to happen again at Nebraska.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mavric    9,128
10 hours ago, Nebfanatic said:

It's been said the difference between recruiting 50th and 20th isn't as big of a difference as 19th to 1st is. 

 

First, that type of thing shouldn't be surprising.  It's called a Bell Curve.

 

Second, No one is expecting us to be competing for the National Championship, at least not right now.  The teams at the top have a decided talent advantage.  The question should be how close are we to being a solid Top 25 team looking to move into the Top 10. 

 

We are currently 29th (693).  We are 160 behind #9 Clemson.  We are 276 ahead of #90 Northern Illinois.  So NIll overcame 170% the talent disadvantage we'd have to overcome to beat the defending National Champions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Whistlepig    94

let me guess....the pipe dream that we can actually or should be able to recruit better than USC, Alabama, OSU etc etc and the history of all our recruiting classes never being in the top ten have already been poo-pooed?

the Coach and culture issue, player development? i could go on but i'm sure there are 100 others who have

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
alwayshusking    625

We need more talent/depth if we want to compete for a NC, even consistently with the best from the East division. 

 

We do have enough talent to be getting better results. I don't think anyone is even complaining we aren't a NC contender. But losing to NIU, escaping vs Ark State and Rutgers. Getting beat at home by 21 by Wisconsin in year 3 is way below the bar. Really all 3 seasons have been pretty tough to watch on the whole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Saunders said:

How many times are we going to bring up this narrative?

 

We are getting more raw talent than anyone else in our division. We aren't developing and coaching it, and that's why we're losing.

 

The end.

The teams coaches a has no identity.  Little bit of this, little that, etc.  And they ARE NOT physically dominant, haven't been since Oz walked out the door.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, HuskerPowerVA said:

That is giving a very generous amount of credit to the recruit ratings process.  What you said about coaching is correct.  

The svcs are pretty accurate, just ask Bama, Clemson, tOSU, etc.

 

That's not to say there aren't good players out there unrecognized by the svcs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nebfanatic    738
7 hours ago, Mavric said:

 

First, that type of thing shouldn't be surprising.  It's called a Bell Curve.

 

Second, No one is expecting us to be competing for the National Championship, at least not right now.  The teams at the top have a decided talent advantage.  The question should be how close are we to being a solid Top 25 team looking to move into the Top 10. 

 

We are currently 29th (693).  We are 160 behind #9 Clemson.  We are 276 ahead of #90 Northern Illinois.  So NIll overcame 170% the talent disadvantage we'd have to overcome to beat the defending National Champions.

Did you even read the post I was replying to? I'm gonna guess you didn't. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HuskerPowerVA    114
7 hours ago, Big Red Commie said:

The svcs are pretty accurate, just ask Bama, Clemson, tOSU, etc.

 

That's not to say there aren't good players out there unrecognized by the svcs.

Those schools also have the three best coaches in the sport.  Just ask Texas, Ole Miss and Tennessee.  Point being that young teenagers who are highly evaluated by recruiting rating services does not necessarily mean that it will translate to the college level. I think we can agree that skill and development are equally important.  I do think recruitment for the right players to fit the scheme (as in the TO years) is a forgotten key to success and that component of the " right fit" is obviously not considered in generic recruit rankings.  

Edited by HuskerPowerVA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Huskers44    86
On 10/12/2017 at 11:20 AM, Saunders said:

And, and for the the "where's the Suh on this team" argument?

 

This was Suh in 2007, with bad coaching:

uschole1.jpg

 

This was suh in 2009 with good coaching:

2009-game-5-photo.jpg

 

I rest my case.

giphy.gif

 

So his freshman sophomore year compared to when he was an upper class man? Great argument because players are always their best when they are a underclassman. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Saunders    5,843
1 minute ago, Huskers44 said:

So his freshman sophomore year compared to when he was an upper class man? Great argument because players are always their best when they are a underclassman. 

doc-rivers.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Saunders    5,843
14 minutes ago, Huskers44 said:

Your argument was horrible. And you picked out 2 plays pretty small sample size bud. 

Lol, ok. I picked Suh as an illustration for the coaching aspect.

 

We out-recruit our peers. We don't out-develop them.

 

If you want, I can post the recruiting numbers for the umpteenth time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, HuskerPowerVA said:

Those schools also have the three best coaches in the sport.  Just ask Texas, Ole Miss and Tennessee.  Point being that young teenagers who are highly evaluated by recruiting rating services does not necessarily mean that it will translate to the college level. I think we can agree that skill and development are equally important.  I do think recruitment for the right players to fit the scheme (as in the TO years) is a forgotten key to success and that component of the " right fit" is obviously not considered in generic recruit rankings.  

Ok, from Bo thru Riley, NE has recruited ~25th on average and has usually hung around in the rankings @ 25th-ish.  I've studied the svcs/rankings thing several times and there is great positive correlation.  If you start out with more skill/talent, well it can be developed to a greater level, but no amount of development will make a Jaylin Bradley into a Leonard Fournette.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
StPaulHusker    4,518
12 minutes ago, Saunders said:

Lol, ok bud. One of us is using data and facts. I picked Suh as an illustration for the coaching aspect.

 

We out-recruit our peers. We don't out-develop them.

 

If you want, I can post the recruiting numbers for the umpteenth time.

If you want to post the recruiting numbers make sure you post if we out-retain said recruits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
StPaulHusker    4,518
7 minutes ago, Saunders said:

 

247 already does that. This is talent currently on the roster, according to recruiting rankings.

 

https://247sports.com/Season/2017-Football/CollegeTeamTalentComposite

So who do you see on here that it is the coach's fault they haven't developed properly and who has just maximized their collegiate potential?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Saunders    5,843
15 minutes ago, StPaulHusker said:

So who do you see on here that it is the coach's fault they haven't developed properly and who has just maximized their collegiate potential?

Everyone. That’s the easiest answer since we’re outrecruiting the rest of the division, and yet still repeatedly losing to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
soup    132
55 minutes ago, StPaulHusker said:

So who do you see on here that it is the coach's fault they haven't developed properly and who has just maximized their collegiate potential?

 

So with that list.  You should be able to notice the fact that the top 3 in the Big 10 are leaps and bounds ahead of the next 6.  Like way ahead.  

Ohio St - 955.51 pts

Michigan - 874.89 pts

Penn St. - 779.49

Then 4-9 are Maryland, Nebraska Michigan St. Wisconsin, NW and Iowa.  All 6 of these teams are within 100 pts of each other.  593-693

The rest are 574 pts to 502 pts.  There is a bigger jump from the 3rd place team to the 1st place than from the 4th to 14th.  That leads me to believe we are right in the middle of mediocrity when it comes to recruiting.  We need to be in that 800 pts Plus range in order to compete with the big boys.

 

Alabama - 997.57

USC - 934

Clemson - 853.65

 

 

 

For reference 13 pts is the difference between having one extra 4 star on the roster vs a 3 star.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Huskers44    86
3 hours ago, Saunders said:

Everyone. That’s the easiest answer since we’re outrecruiting the rest of the division, and yet still repeatedly losing to them.

Or they just are busts? I forgot rankings meant EVERYTHING. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nebhawk    201

Its easy to miss on players after the Top 15 recruiting rankings.  We could have some 4 star players that might be actually 3 star players.  Some 3 star players develop into 4 and 5 star players.  This is coaching them up.  This is finding those who have upside.  This isn't recruiting a kid with an arthritic knee and start him at RB.  Thats not a recruit with upside, is it?  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NUinID    642

Recruiting is such a crap shoot after you get past the sure fire top 100 or so can't miss kids in every recruiting cycle and even then there are some that miss.  Skill guys on offense WR and RB are fairly easy to project on defense CB and Safeties are usually fairly easy.  Linemen on both sides are the hardest to figure out.  

 

Wisconsin regularly outperforms their recruiting rankings because they are so good at developing linemen, especially O-linemen and they move guys from other spots to the line.  Their starting Rt Tackle played QB in HS. Lots of their LB's were guys that played other positions in HS and moved to their spots.  

 

They also know what they are looking for and don't worry nearly as much about recruiting rankings.  They are not afraid to offer guys that maybe are only 2* if  they fit what they want.  They take a lot of Midwest players and they frankly are not usually evaluated as well by the services as on the coasts.  

 

Don't get me wrong they get a lot of quality guys mixed in especially at RB.  Then they develop the heck out of them.  

 

The thing you have to remember is that Wisconsin has been doing the same basic thing with players and player development since 1990 when BA got to Madison.  That system was developed over a long period of time.  Iowa has been working their system since 1999 when Ferentz got their.  Nebraska hasn't worked the same basic system on offense for more than 4 years in a row since 2003.  They have worked how many different defensive systems in that time,  I count 4.  

 

That is by no means an endorsement that MR should be kept though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nebfanatic    738
5 hours ago, NUinID said:

Recruiting is such a crap shoot after you get past the sure fire top 100 or so can't miss kids in every recruiting cycle and even then there are some that miss.  Skill guys on offense WR and RB are fairly easy to project on defense CB and Safeties are usually fairly easy.  Linemen on both sides are the hardest to figure out.  

 

Wisconsin regularly outperforms their recruiting rankings because they are so good at developing linemen, especially O-linemen and they move guys from other spots to the line.  Their starting Rt Tackle played QB in HS. Lots of their LB's were guys that played other positions in HS and moved to their spots.  

 

They also know what they are looking for and don't worry nearly as much about recruiting rankings.  They are not afraid to offer guys that maybe are only 2* if  they fit what they want.  They take a lot of Midwest players and they frankly are not usually evaluated as well by the services as on the coasts.  

 

Don't get me wrong they get a lot of quality guys mixed in especially at RB.  Then they develop the heck out of them.  

 

The thing you have to remember is that Wisconsin has been doing the same basic thing with players and player development since 1990 when BA got to Madison.  That system was developed over a long period of time.  Iowa has been working their system since 1999 when Ferentz got their.  Nebraska hasn't worked the same basic system on offense for more than 4 years in a row since 2003.  They have worked how many different defensive systems in that time,  I count 4.  

 

That is by no means an endorsement that MR should be kept though. 

But at some point we do need to stick with something, maybe even through tough times. Riley may not be the one to follow through the flames I agree. Maybe these are the tough times and our next guy will just be great from the jump (competing year 1, winning alot of football games year 2 and beyond). Either way I think we have to be patient with the next coach(assuming we hire a good one) especially if it's Frost.

Edited by Nebfanatic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Isle of View    158
13 hours ago, LaunchCode said:

Nobody has better athletes than Nebraska in the BIG.  Not even arguable, every true fan knows this already.  It's a fact.

 

 

 

Nobody in the West at least.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MichiganDad3    778

We hired a mediocre coach, and we are getting mediocre results. When Bo was fired, we were told told not to worry because any coach could win 9 games per year here, and MR would immediately compete for and win championships. Forget the talent argument. We have a bad coach and the results are showing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BigRedN    239
18 hours ago, LaunchCode said:

Nobody has better athletes than Nebraska in the BIG.  Not even arguable, every true fan knows this already.  It's a fact.

 

 

 

You are funny!  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×