3-5 yrs

[Enhance]

9 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

it is???

Why do people look at UCF and call them a more talented team than Nebraska? Why do people look at Wisconsin and call them a more talented team than Nebraska? I saw several analysts call UCF a "very talented team" heading into the bowl season. Nebraska out-recruits both of them, but I don't see a lot of people coming out and saying Nebraska is a more "talented" team than either of them.

 

You yourself used the word "believe." That's exactly my point - it's an interpretation. I also weigh how talented someone is based on their ability to perform. You seem to base the word "talent" more (or almost entirely) on potential. I would say Texas recruited a lot of talent for years (and still does), but they haven't been a very talented team.

[BigRedBuster]

2 minutes ago, Enhance said:

I would say Texas recruited a lot of talent for years (and still does), but they haven't been a very talented team.

 

 

Isn't that sort of contradictory?  You admit Texas recruits a lot of talent ( and still does).  But, they aren't a very talented team?

 

I would change that to say, Texas has recruited a lot of good talent and still does.  But, they aren't a very good team.

 

I wouldn't say UCF is a more talented team than Nebraska.  I would say they are a better team.

 

Now, while reading your post and writing mine, something came to mind.  In your definition, the term "talented team" appears to talk specifically about the team as though the team itself is a single living entity.  I know this is getting kind of deep, but, maybe this is where the disconnect is coming from.  Are you saying that the UCF offense is talented because as a unit it can physically be successful even though the players by themselves are not as physically gifted as the players on the UT roster?

 

I'm not sure I'm asking that in a manner that is understandable.  But, maybe this is where the differing interpretation of the term "talented team" is.

[Enhance]

@BigRedBuster I think that might actually be the disconnect. It was sort of what I was trying to wrap my mind around while typing but wasn't doing a great job of relaying it. 

 

When I personally evaluate talent (particularly at the team level) I'm looking at the ultimate product and performance as well. It's hard for me to say a team is talented when they play like hot poop, but I do think it's possible for there to be a lot of talent on the team in terms of potential and physical abilities.

 

It might be contradictory but it somehow makes sense in my head. I just don't think I'm doing a great job of explaining how it makes sense to me.

[BigRedBuster]

1 minute ago, Enhance said:

@BigRedBuster I think that might actually be the disconnect. It was sort of what I was trying to wrap my mind around while typing but wasn't doing a great job of relaying it. 

 

When I personally evaluate talent (particularly at the team level) I'm looking at the ultimate product and performance as well. It's hard for me to say a team is talented when they play like hot poop, but I do think it's possible for there to be a lot of talent on the team in terms of potential and physical abilities.

 

It might be contradictory but it somehow makes sense in my head. I just don't think I'm doing a great job of explaining how it makes sense to me.

And...when I look to see if a team is "talented", I look at the roster.  Does the QB have the ability to manage the offense and make plays to distribute the ball to the other play makers.  Does the RB have the speed, agility and strength to hit the correct hole, make people miss or run over other players to gain yards.  Does the O line players have the physical ability to block the guy on the other side of the ball....etc.

[Crazyhole]

1 hour ago, huskered17 said:

When did the star rating thing start. Did Bob D have many 4/5 star players. Did T.O. have many. We were never in the top ten in recruiting that i can remember, that much. I think the coaches on a staff have a lot to do with how the players turn out of course, but also the way the program is run from the top down. Frost is a step ahead of the last three staff's in that he has Moos backing him big time, and T.O. there to get advice from, and he remembers what it took to get to that level, he lived it. The athletic dept never seemed to be all in like it was in the past. T.O. did get us winning again, but once he left, well we know the problems after that. I think it is starting to look like the athletic dept wants to get back to what we were, they have the backing from the top two guys. 3-5 years isn't that much of a wait. Will see better teams on the field from here on out. Just give Frost and his staff time.

 

GBR!!!

It was a little different prior to around 1999.  Back then it was basically just max emfinger, superprep,  and usatoday doing high school player analysis.  I believe that emfinger had our 1984 or 1985 class rated at the top of the heap and we were generally bringing in highly regarded classes.  1990 was in that same vicinity but I don't recall it being #1.   Superprep was pretty much the authority back then but they just had a blanket rating of "all american" for all of what what would be called 3, 4, and 5 star players today.  

[Crazyhole]

Tom lemming and parade also did recruiting ratings in the 80s and 90s.   Lemming was more thorough. 

[Crazyhole]

1990 and 1992 were considered top 10 classes and emfinger had the 92 class ranked 5th.  

[NUance]

As long as we're talking about comparative talent and performance, you need to factor in schedule too.  Frost did a remarkable job raising UCF out of the gutter.  One of the best turnaround jobs in college football history.  But he didn't play nearly as tough of a schedule at UCF as we play in the Big Ten.  We played the 4th toughest schedule in college football this year.  LINK  UCF played the 81st toughest schedule.  That's a huge difference.  If UCF had played our schedule this year there's no way in hell they'd be 13-0.  But I'd bet dollars to donuts they'd do better than the pathetic 4-8 record we limped home with.  /imho

 

Am I implying that SF isn't a good coach because I pointed out the SOS?  No, I am not.  I think Scott Frost is a GREAT coach, and will do well at NU.  But it's tougher to recruit to Nebraska, and he'll need to recruit a higher level of talent than they had on the roster at UCF--with a couple of notable exceptions.  I personally don't expect as quick a turnaround as he had at UCF.  But I think Frost will right the ship and have us headed in the right direction at least.    

[HANC]

I see a lot of posts about Nebraska has recruited "better" talent than UCF.  First, as I stated in an earlier post, I think UCF has/had MANY players whom would start for Nebraska.  I think they are more talented than people think. They will have more guys drafted in NFL than Nebraska.

 

Second, people are saying (implying) that because Nebraska recruits at a higher level than UCF, that SF should be able to turn around Nebraska as quickly as he did UCF.  Has anyone mentioned that UCF wasn't play AGAINST many 4* and 5* players as we are.  When talent is equal, coaching plays a much bigger role.  When talent isn't equal, coaching can only carry you so far.  I know, I have coached teams with .500 records and then the next year was named COY.  I didn't get any smarter or dumber year by year.  The talent of the kids got better or worse.

 

Someone mentioned in another thread that OSU has 20  4* kids in this class and that we are "after" our potential 4th....... until we recruit at the level of the powers, it will be a struggle.  MR could recruit, just didn't have the right culture.  Hopefully Frost can recruit at a very high level and bing them into the right culture. 

 

* Unless you have both talent and coaching, you will never sustain greatness at a level that people want.

[Crazyhole]

1 hour ago, HANC said:

I see a lot of posts about Nebraska has recruited "better" talent than UCF.  First, as I stated in an earlier post, I think UCF has/had MANY players whom would start for Nebraska.  I think they are more talented than people think. They will have more guys drafted in NFL than Nebraska.

 

Second, people are saying (implying) that because Nebraska recruits at a higher level than UCF, that SF should be able to turn around Nebraska as quickly as he did UCF.  Has anyone mentioned that UCF wasn't play AGAINST many 4* and 5* players as we are.  When talent is equal, coaching plays a much bigger role.  When talent isn't equal, coaching can only carry you so far.  I know, I have coached teams with .500 records and then the next year was named COY.  I didn't get any smarter or dumber year by year.  The talent of the kids got better or worse.

 

Someone mentioned in another thread that OSU has 20  4* kids in this class and that we are "after" our potential 4th....... until we recruit at the level of the powers, it will be a struggle.  MR could recruit, just didn't have the right culture.  Hopefully Frost can recruit at a very high level and bing them into the right culture. 

 

* Unless you have both talent and coaching, you will never sustain greatness at a level that people want.

4 and 5 star players have a larger disparity over lower ranked players for the first couple of years than they do in years 3, 4, and 5.  That's probably the impetus of husker fans saying you don't "need" highly rated players, but that is less true today than it was in the 80s and 90s.  We don't have the freshman team anymore and with the reduced scholarship numbers it's more important to be able to get underclassmen on the field.  

 

Yes, a team full of senior 3 stars should be better than a team full of 4 star freshman due to physical development but it just isn't possible anymore, particularly when you're on the coaching carousel.  

[InOmaha]

The good thing is we currently have the talent to beat every single team in the B1G west division and at least 2 of our non-conference opponents.  It will be nice to win the majority of those games for once with some decent fundamentals, coaching, clock management, and an upgrade in play calling now and then.  Make OSU punt.  I expect that to happen year 1-2.  Not being 4-8 with a coach all but fired will make recruiting next year way easier.

 

Worrying about the big boys is a little on the silly side when your team is splitting games with Northwestern, Purdue, Minnesota and Iowa.  However, this team has the personnel on roster such that getting to a Wisconsin level in year 2 is not some insurmountable goal.  Who wouldn't take that right now?  Winning the Division, maybe getting a shot at a CC game, maybe staying within 2 scores of national championship caliber teams at the end of a game instead of for the first 4 minutes. 

 

Recruiting will pick up.  Ohio state doesn't get high level recruits because Columbus, Ohio has better beaches or mountains then Nebraska  (Tuscaloosa, Alabama for that matter), so I don't agree with the "it's harder to recruit" thing.  It's cold, wet, hot, humid, flat, etc. at these places.  Winning and culture will make them want to come here.  If they don't want to come be a part of it, that's fine.  They'll mess up the culture of excessive amounts of hard work anyway.  I think the staff is going to shock some players with their definition of hard work.  What other staff in the country recruited for one school and prepped a team at another school for a new year's day bowl?

 

 

 

[LaunchCode]

14 hours ago, MichiganDad3 said:

I don't understand the negativity either. Is is especially puzzling given that so many were so sure MR would bring us conference titles .

In Frost's intro press conference he made some telling comments I thought.  Said TO had been advising him that the pieces to win were not in place until after Moos and some other changes had been made.  SF said that N now had the right pieces in place to succeed and the timing was right. 

 

If TO was telling him the time wasn't right prior to Moos's hire, just how bad were things behind the scenes?  How hamstrung was MR from doing his job the way he wanted to?  Will we ever know if Diaco was forced on MR after a 9 win season.  Yes we played a lot of youngsters this year on D, but would the D have performed at a much higher level had their been continuity in the system?  

 

In any event timing is everything.  It remains to be seen how the players respond, but from the administration to the fans, SF will have a lot more support from day 1 than his predecessor and that should make a difficult job easier.  The one thing I think gets overlooked though is the level of coaching in the B1G compared to the AAC.  All it takes is for one coaching staff to figure out a way to stop you, or expose your weaknesses and others will copy it.  Your flaws are much more likely to be exploited.  Going up against a much higher level of coaching week in and week out with good players at their disposal is a much tougher road than what he had in the AAC. 

 

. 

 

 

[Crazyhole]

11 minutes ago, LaunchCode said:

In Frost's intro press conference he made some telling comments I thought.  Said TO had been advising him that the pieces to win were not in place until after Moos and some other changes had been made.  SF said that N now had the right pieces in place to succeed and the timing was right. 

 

If TO was telling him the time wasn't right prior to Moos's hire, just how bad were things behind the scenes?  How hamstrung was MR from doing his job the way he wanted to?  Will we ever know if Diaco was forced on MR after a 9 win season.  Yes we played a lot of youngsters this year on D, but would the D have performed at a much higher level had their been continuity in the system?  

 

In any event timing is everything.  It remains to be seen how the players respond, but from the administration to the fans, SF will have a lot more support from day 1 than his predecessor and that should make a difficult job easier.  The one thing I think gets overlooked though is the level of coaching in the B1G compared to the AAC.  All it takes is for one coaching staff to figure out a way to stop you, or expose your weaknesses and others will copy it.  Your flaws are much more likely to be exploited.  Going up against a much higher level of coaching week in and week out with good players at their disposal is a much tougher road than what he had in the AAC. 

 

. 

 

 

Kind of makes you wonder what kinds of conversations were being had between Riley and Osborne,  or parella and Osborne. 

[MichiganDad3]

17 minutes ago, LaunchCode said:

In Frost's intro press conference he made some telling comments I thought.  Said TO had been advising him that the pieces to win were not in place until after Moos and some other changes had been made.  SF said that N now had the right pieces in place to succeed and the timing was right. 

 

If TO was telling him the time wasn't right prior to Moos's hire, just how bad were things behind the scenes?  How hamstrung was MR from doing his job the way he wanted to?  Will we ever know if Diaco was forced on MR after a 9 win season.  Yes we played a lot of youngsters this year on D, but would the D have performed at a much higher level had their been continuity in the system?  

 

In any event timing is everything.  It remains to be seen how the players respond, but from the administration to the fans, SF will have a lot more support from day 1 than his predecessor and that should make a difficult job easier.  The one thing I think gets overlooked though is the level of coaching in the B1G compared to the AAC.  All it takes is for one coaching staff to figure out a way to stop you, or expose your weaknesses and others will copy it.  Your flaws are much more likely to be exploited.  Going up against a much higher level of coaching week in and week out with good players at their disposal is a much tougher road than what he had in the AAC. 

 

. 

 

 

I agree with the entire system being poisoned.  I think part of Bo's demise was the frustration from fighting SE and Perlman. I also believe that SE fired Banker and hired Diaco. We flushed the rats, now it is time to win!

[Enhance]

2 hours ago, NUance said:

As long as we're talking about comparative talent and performance, you need to factor in schedule too.  Frost did a remarkable job raising UCF out of the gutter.  One of the best turnaround jobs in college football history.  But he didn't play nearly as tough of a schedule at UCF as we play in the Big Ten.  We played the 4th toughest schedule in college football this year.  LINK  UCF played the 81st toughest schedule.

I think it's important to point out that he had great success against comparable talent and teams of similar stature. I feel this sometimes gets lost in the shuffle. It's not like they're Oklahoma playing a G5 schedule - they're a G5 school playing a G5 schedule. Going undefeated is an amazing accomplishment. It only ends up biting them in the ass when it comes to national title contention.

 

For those who watched Frost's interview on the day of the championship, Tim Tebow went after him afterwards for being "selfish" about the whole thing. It seemed like an idiotic response. He also got on his high horse and said (paraphrasing) "if you're a G5 school, get your AD and president to schedule the big boys and then come talk about the national title chase." I could be mistaken, but most of the "big boys" are rarely going to be interested in scheduling a G5 school to the caliber of UCF. Does anyone think Alabama, tOSU, Oklahoma or Clemson is going to schedule UCF in the non-con? No. Everybody knows the narrative. If you lose it doesn't matter if they're a good team - you lost to a G5 school. If you win then, well, you were supposed to do that anyways.