Recruiting effort & this staff

[Decked]

Still concerned with Banker, Hughes, and why we wasted a hire on a full time special teams coach. I see no improvement on the recruiting end despite the fact that the staff has been putting in more work then the last. Both Hughes and Banker strike me as somewhat awkward and unable to relate to recruits and overall players at the college level. But that's just me.

However, I'm impressed by the amount of coaching I saw in the spring by all the other coaches. I think all those guys definitely click here.

 

[Hedley Lamarr]

Still concerned with Banker, Hughes, and why we wasted a hire on a full time special teams coach. I see no improvement on the recruiting end despite the fact that the staff has been putting in more work then the last. Both Hughes and Banker strike me as somewhat awkward and unable to relate to recruits and overall players at the college level. But that's just me.

However, I'm impressed by the amount of coaching I saw in the spring by all the other coaches. I think all those guys definitely click here.

We hired a FBS DC as our DL coach and a FBS DC as our DB coach. If our 3 FBS DCs can't breakdown film and put us in a position to compete consistently then color me confused

 

[Mierin]

I'm not seeing improvement in recruiting either. We're ranked 30th (by stars) on rivals. I know they're aiming for a lot more players but as far as I can see there aren't a lot of 4 stars on the radar. I feel like that's more important than total points since you can have a huge class of 2 stars and 3 stars and have a decent ranking.

That being said, I've always been in the camp that is happy if Nebraska is ranked 20-30 in recruiting, so it doesn't bother me much. I'm just confused as to why I keep seeing people on this board talking about Riley being so much better at it. I know it's fun to bash Pelini but that seems like all it is.

 

[Warrior10]

I'm not seeing improvement in recruiting either. We're ranked 30th (by stars) on rivals. I know they're aiming for a lot more players but as far as I can see there aren't a lot of 4 stars on the radar. I feel like that's more important than total points since you can have a huge class of 2 stars and 3 stars and have a decent ranking.

That being said, I've always been in the camp that is happy if Nebraska is ranked 20-30 in recruiting, so it doesn't bother me much. I'm just confused as to why I keep seeing people on this board talking about Riley being so much better at it. I know it's fun to bash Pelini but that seems like all it is.

21st on scout.

 

[zoogs]

21st on 247 composite, too.

Bo's staff could recruit and close, too -- when they wanted to.

I think the biggest difference you're going to see is in the numbers game. You only get so many spots to make your team better, and Riley has shown much more willingness to manage the numbers. I disagree that you can simply have a huge class of 2 and 3 stars and have a decent ranking -- but if you have a small class (there's a cutoff somewhere) you do get punished somewhat. This is why, in recent years, the calling card would be, "Okay, yes, but let's look at average star ranking instead."

And the attitude around this time of year would be "Yes, but the class will fill up eventually."

Bo was simply not a 365 year-round recruiter, nor did he take much pleasure in selling Nebraska. Riley will be both, but clearly that alone is not going to morph into a class of all 4 and 5-stars. Though, yes, you do hope that with the '17 class and beyond they start making some bigger waves.

I'd caution against anyone expecting Riley to be Urban Meyer or James Franklin on the recruiting front, though. That would be setting yourself up for disappointment. He's creative, energetic, and relentless, but both he and the staff he hired here are clearly coaches first. Which disappointed those wanting Orgeron, etc, and might end up being a fair criticism. We have some good recruiters, too, but if we struggle we're going to end up looking at Hughes and Read, for example, and wondering if they bring enough overall to the table.

 

[TITANIC VS LUSITANIA]

Still concerned with Banker, Hughes, and why we wasted a hire on a full time special teams coach. I see no improvement on the recruiting end despite the fact that the staff has been putting in more work then the last. Both Hughes and Banker strike me as somewhat awkward and unable to relate to recruits and overall players at the college level. But that's just me.

However, I'm impressed by the amount of coaching I saw in the spring by all the other coaches. I think all those guys definitely click here.

We hired a FBS DC as our DL coach and a FBS DC as our DB coach. If our 3 FBS DCs can't breakdown film and put us in a position to compete consistently then color me confused

I kinda agree too. To me Hughes and Stewart seem kinda awkward. Banker seems ok, but I dont judge him as harshly because I feel the position coaches personalities are huge in clicking with the recruits.

But hey, Stewart got Bootle today, so maybe hes got it.

In the old staff we had warren, now we have bray. I just wish we had more of them

 

[Landlord]

I'm not seeing improvement in recruiting either. We're ranked 30th (by stars) on rivals. I know they're aiming for a lot more players but as far as I can see there aren't a lot of 4 stars on the radar. I feel like that's more important than total points since you can have a huge class of 2 stars and 3 stars and have a decent ranking.

That being said, I've always been in the camp that is happy if Nebraska is ranked 20-30 in recruiting, so it doesn't bother me much. I'm just confused as to why I keep seeing people on this board talking about Riley being so much better at it. I know it's fun to bash Pelini but that seems like all it is.

The biggest improvement is in attitude. This staff seems to enjoy the process, or if they don't, they sure as hell hide it well They enjoy the riches they've been handed, they enjoy being able to take innovative approaches, and they believe they have something great to sell. It's like a kid that grew up his entire life eating lame vegetables, and all the sudden finds himself in a massive candy store.

I figured the first year would be tough recruiting for the new staff. Riley isn't an ultra splash hire which usually results in a ton of talent fast, and Nebraska doesn't have quite the elite mystique of getting those caliber of kids to jump on board right away either. But there is tons of reasons for optimism and excitement, imo.

 

[Mierin]

I disagree that you can simply have a huge class of 2 and 3 stars and have a decent ranking -- but if you have a small class (there's a cutoff somewhere) you do get punished somewhat. This is why, in recent years, the calling card would be, "Okay, yes, but let's look at average star ranking instead."

Iowa (and other teams) are proof that you can. They're ranked ahead of us with 2.62 average star ranking. I think star ranking is much more important unless you only have like 5 recruits.

I'm not seeing improvement in recruiting either. We're ranked 30th (by stars) on rivals. I know they're aiming for a lot more players but as far as I can see there aren't a lot of 4 stars on the radar. I feel like that's more important than total points since you can have a huge class of 2 stars and 3 stars and have a decent ranking.

That being said, I've always been in the camp that is happy if Nebraska is ranked 20-30 in recruiting, so it doesn't bother me much. I'm just confused as to why I keep seeing people on this board talking about Riley being so much better at it. I know it's fun to bash Pelini but that seems like all it is.

The biggest improvement is in attitude. This staff seems to enjoy the process, or if they don't, they sure as hell hide it well They enjoy the riches they've been handed, they enjoy being able to take innovative approaches, and they believe they have something great to sell. It's like a kid that grew up his entire life eating lame vegetables, and all the sudden finds himself in a massive candy store.

I figured the first year would be tough recruiting for the new staff. Riley isn't an ultra splash hire which usually results in a ton of talent fast, and Nebraska doesn't have quite the elite mystique of getting those caliber of kids to jump on board right away either. But there is tons of reasons for optimism and excitement, imo.

Why do any of us care about the staff's attitude on recruiting other than it makes us feel like we're in the loop? If this good attitude produces better results, fine. If not, I don't care how wonderful their attitudes are. Again, I'm happy with 20-30, I just think people are being crazy-optimistic here. Hopefully it'll end up being a great class and you were all good fortune tellers. I just don't think Bo was as awful at recruiting as people seem to think. I think his worst class was like #34?

 

[Landlord]

Why do any of us care about the staff's attitude on recruiting other than it makes us feel like we're in the loop? If this good attitude produces better results, fine. If not, I don't care how wonderful their attitudes are. Again, I'm happy with 20-30, I just think people are being crazy-optimistic here. Hopefully it'll end up being a great class and you were all good fortune tellers. I just don't think Bo was as awful at recruiting as people seem to think. I think his worst class was like #34?

I think you're being intentionally dense. If you're hiring an employee, do you go with the person that does their job satisfactorily but begrudgingly, or do you go with the person that shows a ton of enthusiasm and enjoyment towards it, even at the same results? Even at the exact same clip, a positive attitude is still infectious and seeps into other areas.

Personally, I think we can average about 5 spots higher than you think, around the 15-25 year on a yearly basis. Bo did an OK job at it, but he did it relentingly, and often with patch work and band-aids. If Bo got 20-30 classes, with everything you know and feel in hindsight about how he ran and approached this program, how can you not think that Riley can do better than that?

 

[alwayshusking]

21st on 247 composite, too.

Bo's staff could recruit and close, too -- when they wanted to.

I think the biggest difference you're going to see is in the numbers game. You only get so many spots to make your team better, and Riley has shown much more willingness to manage the numbers. I disagree that you can simply have a huge class of 2 and 3 stars and have a decent ranking -- but if you have a small class (there's a cutoff somewhere) you do get punished somewhat. This is why, in recent years, the calling card would be, "Okay, yes, but let's look at average star ranking instead."

And the attitude around this time of year would be "Yes, but the class will fill up eventually."

Bo was simply not a 365 year-round recruiter, nor did he take much pleasure in selling Nebraska. Riley will be both, but clearly that alone is not going to morph into a class of all 4 and 5-stars. Though, yes, you do hope that with the '17 class and beyond they start making some bigger waves.

I'd caution against anyone expecting Riley to be Urban Meyer or James Franklin on the recruiting front, though. That would be setting yourself up for disappointment. He's creative, energetic, and relentless, but both he and the staff he hired here are clearly coaches first. Which disappointed those wanting Orgeron, etc, and might end up being a fair criticism. We have some good recruiters, too, but if we struggle we're going to end up looking at Hughes and Read, for example, and wondering if they bring enough overall to the table.

Yeah the numbers thing is a huge deal. No more having just 4 scholarship LBs without a real plan going forward. Bo's roster management was a bigger weakness than his recruiting, though they go hand in hand.

Also guys that aren't fully buying in are getting their walking papers with the new staff. Those types were able to soak up scholarships for years under Pelini.

I like where this class is right now, but it could be better. I think they'll be doing more big game hunting during OV season, which is no surprise given our location.

 

[Mierin]

Why do any of us care about the staff's attitude on recruiting other than it makes us feel like we're in the loop? If this good attitude produces better results, fine. If not, I don't care how wonderful their attitudes are. Again, I'm happy with 20-30, I just think people are being crazy-optimistic here. Hopefully it'll end up being a great class and you were all good fortune tellers. I just don't think Bo was as awful at recruiting as people seem to think. I think his worst class was like #34?

I think you're being intentionally dense. If you're hiring an employee, do you go with the person that does their job satisfactorily but begrudgingly, or do you go with the person that shows a ton of enthusiasm and enjoyment towards it, even at the same results? Even at the exact same clip, a positive attitude is still infectious and seeps into other areas.

Personally, I think we can average about 5 spots higher than you think, around the 15-25 year on a yearly basis. Bo did an OK job at it, but he did it relentingly, and often with patch work and band-aids. If Bo got 20-30 classes, with everything you know and feel in hindsight about how he ran and approached this program, how can you not think that Riley can do better than that?

I asked why we should care, not why his boss should care. I don't give a flying fruit what kind of attitude the coaches have about recruiting if it ends up netting the same type of recruiting class. Now if we're talking overall about every aspect of the job (which is what you're talking about when you say "other areas") then ya I suppose that matters... if it produces better results on the field.

Where's your evidence of Bo going at recruiting begrudgingly? Just because he didn't talk about it constantly on twitter doesn't mean he did it begrudgingly. It just wasn't his style to do things out in the open for the fans to see. And he had a #11 class.

Riley's way of doing it is (potentially) much better, imo, and it's how I would do it. But there's not enough proof yet to know he's going to be better at it than Bo, and there's certainly not enough proof of it that it should be causing all sorts of comments about this amazing class and how terrible Bo was in comparison, which is what I've been seeing the past couple of months. That doesn't mean I'm not hopeful that he'll be better at it. I think he will be. I have no problem with people being optimistic about it. I've just seen people go overboard several times and acting like Bo was sh#t at it. If Riley brings in top 15 classes year after year then I'll agree Bo was sh#t at it but it's way too soon for that.

 

[teachercd]

Why do any of us care about the staff's attitude on recruiting other than it makes us feel like we're in the loop? If this good attitude produces better results, fine. If not, I don't care how wonderful their attitudes are. Again, I'm happy with 20-30, I just think people are being crazy-optimistic here. Hopefully it'll end up being a great class and you were all good fortune tellers. I just don't think Bo was as awful at recruiting as people seem to think. I think his worst class was like #34?

I think you're being intentionally dense. If you're hiring an employee, do you go with the person that does their job satisfactorily but begrudgingly, or do you go with the person that shows a ton of enthusiasm and enjoyment towards it, even at the same results? Even at the exact same clip, a positive attitude is still infectious and seeps into other areas.

Personally, I think we can average about 5 spots higher than you think, around the 15-25 year on a yearly basis. Bo did an OK job at it, but he did it relentingly, and often with patch work and band-aids. If Bo got 20-30 classes, with everything you know and feel in hindsight about how he ran and approached this program, how can you not think that Riley can do better than that?

I asked why we should care, not why his boss should care. I don't give a flying fruit what kind of attitude the coaches have about recruiting if it ends up netting the same type of recruiting class. Now if we're talking overall about every aspect of the job (which is what you're talking about when you say "other areas") then ya I suppose that matters... if it produces better results on the field.

Where's your evidence of Bo going at recruiting begrudgingly? Just because he didn't talk about it constantly on twitter doesn't mean he did it begrudgingly. It just wasn't his style to do things out in the open for the fans to see. And he had a #11 class.

Riley's way of doing it is (potentially) much better, imo, and it's how I would do it. But there's not enough proof yet to know he's going to be better at it than Bo, and there's certainly not enough proof of it that it should be causing all sorts of comments about this amazing class and how terrible Bo was in comparison, which is what I've been seeing the past couple of months. That doesn't mean I'm not hopeful that he'll be better at it. I think he will be. I have no problem with people being optimistic about it. I've just seen people go overboard several times and acting like Bo was sh#t at it. If Riley brings in top 15 classes year after year then I'll agree Bo was sh#t at it but it's way too soon for that.

I think you nailed it.

1. I don't care if they smile all day at work or scowl all day. Just get results

2. I also feel like we are being the super optimistic fans just like we were with Bo. "Hidden Gem" "I trust the coaches" things like is what we area seeing again. My other favorite "I can't figure out why this guy doesn't have more offers"

3. And now, I notice this shift where we are supposed to NOT care about rivals rankings and only care about 247 and Scout and ESPN.

That is find and dandy, it really is but I just feel like we are being super hyped about recruits that "look" about the same. I hope I am wrong and I hope they all get bumped up and I hope that the buskers kick a$$ this year!

I agree that the attitude looks different because we are more in the loop but the results don't look much different, yet.

 

[Hedley Lamarr]

I disagree that you can simply have a huge class of 2 and 3 stars and have a decent ranking -- but if you have a small class (there's a cutoff somewhere) you do get punished somewhat. This is why, in recent years, the calling card would be, "Okay, yes, but let's look at average star ranking instead."

Iowa (and other teams) are proof that you can. They're ranked ahead of us with 2.62 average star ranking. I think star ranking is much more important unless you only have like 5 recruits.

I'm not seeing improvement in recruiting either. We're ranked 30th (by stars) on rivals. I know they're aiming for a lot more players but as far as I can see there aren't a lot of 4 stars on the radar. I feel like that's more important than total points since you can have a huge class of 2 stars and 3 stars and have a decent ranking.

That being said, I've always been in the camp that is happy if Nebraska is ranked 20-30 in recruiting, so it doesn't bother me much. I'm just confused as to why I keep seeing people on this board talking about Riley being so much better at it. I know it's fun to bash Pelini but that seems like all it is.

The biggest improvement is in attitude. This staff seems to enjoy the process, or if they don't, they sure as hell hide it well They enjoy the riches they've been handed, they enjoy being able to take innovative approaches, and they believe they have something great to sell. It's like a kid that grew up his entire life eating lame vegetables, and all the sudden finds himself in a massive candy store.

I figured the first year would be tough recruiting for the new staff. Riley isn't an ultra splash hire which usually results in a ton of talent fast, and Nebraska doesn't have quite the elite mystique of getting those caliber of kids to jump on board right away either. But there is tons of reasons for optimism and excitement, imo.

Why do any of us care about the staff's attitude on recruiting other than it makes us feel like we're in the loop? If this good attitude produces better results, fine. If not, I don't care how wonderful their attitudes are. Again, I'm happy with 20-30, I just think people are being crazy-optimistic here. Hopefully it'll end up being a great class and you were all good fortune tellers. I just don't think Bo was as awful at recruiting as people seem to think. I think his worst class was like #34?

Iowa is ranked ahead of us because they have a full class of MAC level talent for the most part. We on the other hand have 10+ open slots. Iowa will finish well outside the top 25 in recruiting

 

[Stumpy1]

Bo and staff were good recruiters when they wanted to be. The problem was that they only wanted to be that way about 50% of the time. This current staff is more energetic and focused about it, hence the Satellite camps and all the summer visits. During Bo's tenure, we rarely used all of our allotted official visits during the season. My guess is because Bo didn't want to worry about recruits on game days. Our game days are one of our biggest selling points and Bo didn't take advantage of that. With Riley, I don't think we will have to worry about that issue. He is already better at selling the University to recruits then what Bo ever was.

 

[The Dude]

Bo's first full class was ranked 42nd by the 247 composite. This one is at 21, with 10+ spots left to fill.

It's way too early to say anything definitive, but so far, so good.