In-State Talent vs. Out-State Talent

[Mavric]

We better land one hell of a class if we are going to continue to hemorrhage in state talent

See, it's this type of comment that has many people thinking you're a troll.

It's heavy on the implication that the talent currently leaving the state is basically on par with the talent we're bringing in.

So - by your standards - it should be based on at least some evidence, which you have failed to present.

My statement means: if you let guys who are DIA caliber players out of the state, you better land guys who are better (and who actually develop in and stay with the program).

I've written more on the topic and the underlying evidence elsewhere in this thread and on the board. I won't repeat it again here. If you want, I'll send you links.

We'll know a little more in February and a lot more in four years.

No, it is not necessarily a problem letting guys who are D1 caliber out of the state. It is really only a problem if we are letting guys who are legit Power 5 prospects out of the state. There is a definite difference.

I would really like to see your underlying evidence. You can post the links here. But considering each prospect - let alone class - is different, you'd really have to be showing that the guys who are leaving now are better than the guys we have committed. I have a hard time believing you have any way to do that. Thus making brash statements like this is not helping your believably.

I'm going to choose to not engage in the fight you're trying to pick.

I'll just say that we'll need to wait and see what we do come February.

I'm not trying to pick a fight. I just think it would be handy if you hold yourself to the standard you try to demand from others.

 

[cm husker]

too bad we don't have any organizations that measure the athletes skills at camps and are able to compare players from across the country based on those tests

Those organizations are mainly garbage when it comes to evaluating kids from smaller markets. Even though they have tried to pretend that they aren't.

 

[cm husker]

Mav,

Posters have consistently complained about our depth, especially on the OL. Losing guys like walker and others to D1 schools are missed opportunities. We won't be able to know for sure though until things play out. It's completely possible that we will be fine - as I said - if we land top producers from elsewhere.

 

[Mavric]

Mav,

Posters have consistently complained about our depth, especially on the OL. Losing guys like walker and others to D1 schools are missed opportunities. We won't be able to know for sure though until things play out. It's completely possible that we will be fine - as I said - if we land top producers from elsewhere.

No, that is a totally different argument. That argument would only be valid if we were not taking others at the same position. For your original argument to be valid, you have to show that the guys we have been passing on are consistently better than the guy we're taking.

 

[cm husker]

Mav,

My original statement:

"We better land one hell of a class if we are going to continue to hemorrhage in state talent"

What's your issue with this "if then" proposition?

If, in February, we've landed guys who are better than the in state talent that's leaving, then it's not an issue. We'll know even more in a few years based on how things pan out.

Not sure why this has touched such a nerve with you. It's much different than asking for evidence to support an opinion regarding circumstances that have already played out.

 

[commando]

too bad we don't have any organizations that measure the athletes skills at camps and are able to compare players from across the country based on those tests

Those organizations are mainly garbage when it comes to evaluating kids from smaller markets. Even though they have tried to pretend that they aren't.

those kids all get tested running the same drills. they are all timed on the same runs. they are all judged on the same lifts. how do you say they are garbage without any proof? i am sure that some kids develope more after these camps and some regress....but at the camps they are all judged on the same stuff.

 

[cm husker]

You think the star ratings are assigned based testing?

 

[commando]

You think the star ratings are assigned based testing?

the kids i know that have gone there seemed to think it was fair and balanced. the parents of kids that i have talked to also thought so. but hey....you are the super genius so what can anyone else know?

 

[husker98]

Star ratings are worthless. If you met and talk to the guys who compile and rate kids on these sites you would have little or no faith in them.

Not to say they don't get it right, but they get it wrong more often then not. Prince amukamara, or maybe it was eric hagg its been to long, was a one star when he committed here and ended up drafted an playing in the NFL. Patrick O'brien wasn't a 4* until he went on their special camp tour. Gebbia's rating has suffered because he hasn't played their camp game.

Andy Janovich is the poster boy for this argument. Rural Nebraska kid gets no spotlight or attention and thus no stars.

This program was built on these kids like Janovich. And its disturbing to me that Craig Bohl is next door using that formula to great success in Laramie with a fraction of our resources. I'm increasingly beginning to look at our future games with them with worry because their team is filling up with spurned Nebraska kids looking to take their shot at us.

That said we have to go out and get elite talent like this staff has been doing or we won't win the conference regularly, let alone another national title. Wisconsin fell into that rut under Alverez and Bielema and is still in it to this day. Just enough talent to compete at the top end, but not enough to win it all.

I don't envy the staff position on this issue, don't take kids like this and your chastised for it. Don't snag enough big time talent, and you pestered about it all year. Good luck finding any middle ground.

 

[Mavric]

Mav,

My original statement:

"We better land one hell of a class if we are going to continue to hemorrhage in state talent"

What's your issue with this "if then" proposition?

It's heavy on the implication that the talent currently leaving the state is basically on par with the talent we're bringing in.

So - by your standards - it should be based on at least some evidence, which you have failed to present.

If, in February, we've landed guys who are better than the in state talent that's leaving, then it's not an issue. We'll know even more in a few years based on how things pan out.

If we have to wait until Feburary to see who we've landed, then we have to wait until February to see who's actually leaving, don't we. So you're applying one standard to one side and a different standard to the other side.

Again.

Not sure why this has touched such a nerve with you. It's much different than asking for evidence to support an opinion regarding circumstances that have already played out.

No, it's not any different. It's only different because you want to be able to apply a different standard to yourself that what you apply to others.

Again.

 

[Mavric]

too bad we don't have any organizations that measure the athletes skills at camps and are able to compare players from across the country based on those tests

Those organizations are mainly garbage when it comes to evaluating kids from smaller markets. Even though they have tried to pretend that they aren't.

What evidence do you have of this?

 

[commando]

too bad we don't have any organizations that measure the athletes skills at camps and are able to compare players from across the country based on those tests

Those organizations are mainly garbage when it comes to evaluating kids from smaller markets. Even though they have tried to pretend that they aren't.

What evidence do you have of this?

he is cm.....

 

[GBRFAN]

We better land one hell of a class if we are going to continue to hemorrhage in state talent

See, it's this type of comment that has many people thinking you're a troll.

It's heavy on the implication that the talent currently leaving the state is basically on par with the talent we're bringing in.

So - by your standards - it should be based on at least some evidence, which you have failed to present.

My statement means: if you let guys who are DIA caliber players out of the state, you better land guys who are better (and who actually develop in and stay with the program).

I've written more on the topic and the underlying evidence elsewhere in this thread and on the board. I won't repeat it again here. If you want, I'll send you links.

We'll know a little more in February and a lot more in four years.

No, it is not necessarily a problem letting guys who are D1 caliber out of the state. It is really only a problem if we are letting guys who are legit Power 5 prospects out of the state. There is a definite difference.

I would really like to see your underlying evidence. You can post the links here. But considering each prospect - let alone class - is different, you'd really have to be showing that the guys who are leaving now are better than the guys we have committed. I have a hard time believing you have any way to do that. Thus making brash statements like this is not helping your believably.

I'm going to choose to not engage in the fight you're trying to pick.

I'll just say that we'll need to wait and see what we do come February.

+1 to Mav - i hope we see this reply from CM more often

 

[cm husker]

too bad we don't have any organizations that measure the athletes skills at camps and are able to compare players from across the country based on those tests

Those organizations are mainly garbage when it comes to evaluating kids from smaller markets. Even though they have tried to pretend that they aren't.

What evidence do you have of this?

I'll send you a peer reviewed paper.

 

[Stumpy1]

Star ratings are worthless. If you met and talk to the guys who compile and rate kids on these sites you would have little or no faith in them.

Not to say they don't get it right, but they get it wrong more often then not. Prince amukamara, or maybe it was eric hagg its been to long, was a one star when he committed here and ended up drafted an playing in the NFL. Patrick O'brien wasn't a 4* until he went on their special camp tour. Gebbia's rating has suffered because he hasn't played their camp game.

Andy Janovich is the poster boy for this argument. Rural Nebraska kid gets no spotlight or attention and thus no stars.

This program was built on these kids like Janovich. And its disturbing to me that Craig Bohl is next door using that formula to great success in Laramie with a fraction of our resources. I'm increasingly beginning to look at our future games with them with worry because their team is filling up with spurned Nebraska kids looking to take their shot at us.

That said we have to go out and get elite talent like this staff has been doing or we won't win the conference regularly, let alone another national title. Wisconsin fell into that rut under Alverez and Bielema and is still in it to this day. Just enough talent to compete at the top end, but not enough to win it all.

I don't envy the staff position on this issue, don't take kids like this and your chastised for it. Don't snag enough big time talent, and you pestered about it all year. Good luck finding any middle ground.

Both Prince and Hagg were 3* players coming out of HS.

Nebraska wasn't built on the likes of Jano. It was a mixture of Nebraska kids and kids from other places that fit into what we were doing.