OLB Cameron Lenhardt

[Dr. Strangelove]

Getting Williams, Leonhardt and Coleman would really salvage this recruiting class.

Nebraska is looking at raking ~20 recruits, so they need 6-8 total 4 :star players to make it successful. 

 

[84HuskerLaw]

They’re likely to get another #35 ish class by time it’s over.  All things considered, that’s very good for a team with a terrible record for past 5 seasons and a coach of the red hot seat.   That’s a good sign that, if the team can somehow find 8–9 wins plus a bowl, they’ll likely hold on to the commits and pick up a couple must gets in the end.   This class has some solid prospects already.  Couple more and the staff can focus full time on the critical needs O line and D Line.  The school with the history of great O lines for decades must do better there to start winning consistently!  But the do have a good start and some momentum!  

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

They’re likely to get another #35 ish class by time it’s over.  All things considered, that’s very good for a team with a terrible record for past 5 seasons and a coach of the red hot seat.   That’s a good sign that, if the team can somehow find 8–9 wins plus a bowl, they’ll likely hold on to the commits and pick up a couple must gets in the end.   This class has some solid prospects already.  Couple more and the staff can focus full time on the critical needs O line and D Line.  The school with the history of great O lines for decades must do better there to start winning consistently!  But the do have a good start and some momentum!  

Overall class rank may be low, but it's a small class.

The important metric Nebraska needs to hit is having ~35-40% of the class be ranked 4 stars or higher. A realistic goal for a recruiting class numbering around 20 recruits is 7. 

Nebraska has a chance to hit that number if they land Lenhardt and Coleman. They need to find two more after that which is difficult but doable.

 

[84HuskerLaw]

Overall class rank may be low, but it's a small class.

The important metric Nebraska needs to hit is having ~35-40% of the class be ranked 4 stars or higher. A realistic goal for a recruiting class numbering around 20 recruits is 7. 

Nebraska has a chance to hit that number if they land Lenhardt and Coleman. They need to find two more after that which is difficult but doable.

Well, I agree but I’m more inclined to judge by the positions filled of most critical needs.  We have some fairly well stocked positions WR, secondary (always take one or two greats but), RB, QB and ILB.  Areas to hit imo are OL, DL, OLB/RE.  On paper, though young and or unproven, kick and punt return guys could be good.   Same with kickers but you would never not take a ‘special’ specialist.  One or two great tackling safeties be good to grab as well, but I have faith in Fish.  

 

[ArkanSkers]

Schaefer CB for N. Confidence level 7

 

[Decked]

Sounds like they are just waiting at this point 

 

[The Scarlet Pimpernel]

Overall class rank may be low, but it's a small class

I hear this same excuse pretty much every year. We’re currently 29th overall and #7 in the conference. Doesn’t look that great when you see it in that context. Lenhardt and Coleman would make me feel a little better. 

 

[Mavric]

I hear this same excuse pretty much every year. We’re currently 29th overall and #7 in the conference. Doesn’t look that great when you see it in that context. Lenhardt and Coleman would make me feel a little better. 

By "pretty much every year" you apparently mean "last year" because we had three straight Top 20 classes before that.

 

[The Scarlet Pimpernel]

By "pretty much every year" you apparently mean "last year" because we had three straight Top 20 classes before that.

I guess my standards are a little higher than yours. Top 20 isn't that good. 

 

[Mavric]

I guess my standards are a little higher than yours. Top 20 isn't that good. 

I guess my standards are a little more realistic than yours.

 

[The Scarlet Pimpernel]

I guess my standards are a little more realistic than yours.

That’s hilarious - when I say I’m being realistic with my predictions, I’m labeled as a pessimist, even when they end up being 100% accurate. Remember Minnesota 2013?  I told you I was being realistic with my prediction, coming off our loss the previous week and up against a Gopher team that was playing well. I believe your words were, “We’re not losing to Minnesota.”  What about the Riley hire, which I called a major fail? I was told, "It's an excellent hire - his past players all love him." When I pointed out that it wasn't realistic to think that a guy with his career win % could suddenly win here you said, "He'll have resources he's never had before!" I said no way, and was called a pessimist. Can't have it both ways! 

People told me I was being “unrealistic” when I started teaching at my current school, which at the time was an “F” school. 80% minority and economically disadvantaged. I said it could be done, if we set a goal and kept our standards high and didn’t waver. We’re now a “B” school, nearly an A. The teachers who had more "realistic" views, who had given in to the belief that couldn't be done, all fell to the wayside.

I remember the days when it was a disappointment when we didn’t win the conference and compete in a major bowl… now people are satisfied with barely finishing in the Top 20 in recruiting and in the polls. One of the biggest problems is that fans like you have lowered your expectations. You’ve wavered and made excuses as to why this team can’t still be consistently successful and competing for championships.
 

I’ll keep my “unrealistic” high standards.  

 

[Vince R.]

Just my opinion. I think he could be a hell of a middle linebacker. 

 

[Mavric]

That’s hilarious - when I say I’m being realistic with my predictions, I’m labeled as a pessimist, even when they end up being 100% accurate. Remember Minnesota 2013?  I told you I was being realistic with my prediction, coming off our loss the previous week and up against a Gopher team that was playing well. I believe your words were, “We’re not losing to Minnesota.”  What about the Riley hire, which I called a major fail? I was told, "It's an excellent hire - his past players all love him." When I pointed out that it wasn't realistic to think that a guy with his career win % could suddenly win here you said, "He'll have resources he's never had before!" I said no way, and was called a pessimist. Can't have it both ways! 

People told me I was being “unrealistic” when I started teaching at my current school, which at the time was an “F” school. 80% minority and economically disadvantaged. I said it could be done, if we set a goal and kept our standards high and didn’t waver. We’re now a “B” school, nearly an A. The teachers who had more "realistic" views, who had given in to the belief that couldn't be done, all fell to the wayside.

I remember the days when it was a disappointment when we didn’t win the conference and compete in a major bowl… now people are satisfied with barely finishing in the Top 20 in recruiting and in the polls. One of the biggest problems is that fans like you have lowered your expectations. You’ve wavered and made excuses as to why this team can’t still be consistently successful and competing for championships.
 

I’ll keep my “unrealistic” high standards.  

Wow.  So you’ve got to throw out something I supposedly said nine years ago?  Nice to know you’re not obsessive.

Pretty sure I didn’t say that about Minnesota.  I know for a fact that I didn’t say that about Riley.  Either you’re confusing me with someone else or you’re making another one of your brash statements that isn’t true.

And you did a heck of a job arguing why your right about recruiting without making any points about why you’re right about recruiting.  

 

[The Scarlet Pimpernel]

Oh, I'm quite obsessive. I don't care for hypocrisy. I have old topics and threads screenshot and saved, over a dozen, where everything I said turned out to be 100% accurate, yet I was banned for being "negative" or a "pessimist." And yes, unless there's another Mavric, it was you. ("I guess you know more than Keyshawn Johnson  :lol: ")

You can call my statements brash; I call yours snarky. 

As for why I'm right about recruiting, well, isn't it obvious? Look at the past two decades! What have we accomplished with our barely "Top 20" classes? Nothing. Meanwhile, look at the teams who are winning conference and national titles. All had multiple Top 10 classes in the years leading up to their national title victories. 

One thing you've gotta remember is that I live in the heart of SEC country, and it's a constant barrage of notifications every time LSU lands a commit. In the past two weeks they've landed I don't know how many 4 and 5-star recruits. It's hard for me to be optimistic about Nebraska when 80% of our commits are 3* guys and I'm told constantly by our fans that "stars don't matter." Yeah, tell Saban and Dabo and Kirby and Day and other championship-level coaches that stars don't matter. 

I know that these schools hold geographical advantages. When that's the case, you have to do whatever it takes to level the playing field. Pay the best possible recruiters to come and recruit. Mickey Joseph has proven it can be done. For the right coach, players will come. I really thought that Frost, coming off his success at UCF, would be able to land some elite prospects, but admittedly, I was wrong. I'm still holding out hope, but when you look realistically at things as compared to other teams in our conference and around the country, our recruiting status isn't that great. It's nice to be optimistic when we land a promising athlete, but like I said before, they need to become the norm, not the exception.

I had an A/C repairman at my house yesterday, an older gentleman. He saw the Nebraska decals on my vehicle and said, "I remember when Nebraska used to always be one of the top teams in the country... now they've completely fallen off. They were always at the top, now they're at the bottom. What happened?" That's where we are, folks. 

 

[Lorewarn]

That’s hilarious - when I say I’m being realistic with my predictions, I’m labeled as a pessimist, even when they end up being 100% accurate. Remember Minnesota 2013?  I told you I was being realistic with my prediction, coming off our loss the previous week and up against a Gopher team that was playing well. I believe your words were, “We’re not losing to Minnesota.”  What about the Riley hire, which I called a major fail? I was told, "It's an excellent hire - his past players all love him." When I pointed out that it wasn't realistic to think that a guy with his career win % could suddenly win here you said, "He'll have resources he's never had before!" I said no way, and was called a pessimist. Can't have it both ways! 

I have old topics and threads screenshot and saved, over a dozen, where everything I said turned out to be 100% accurate, yet I was banned for being "negative" or a "pessimist." And yes, unless there's another Mavric, it was you. ("I guess you know more than Keyshawn Johnson  :lol: ")

If you've got these screenshots, post them. Also post the screenshot of you being banned with the explained reason being that you were negative. Would love to see those.

People told me I was being “unrealistic” when I started teaching at my current school, which at the time was an “F” school. 80% minority and economically disadvantaged. I said it could be done, if we set a goal and kept our standards high and didn’t waver. We’re now a “B” school, nearly an A. The teachers who had more "realistic" views, who had given in to the belief that couldn't be done, all fell to the wayside.

First of all nobody literally gives a single s#!t about how amazing of a teacher you are. Second of all, I'm worried you're going to need to go to the chiropractor you're patting yourself on the back way, way too hard. Third of all, there's a difference between being unrealistic with things you can control and things you can't. Your perseverance and dedication as a teacher is on you - how your favorite football team does on the recruiting trail doesn't have a single ounce to do with you, so not sure how or why you're bringing up your personal life in regards to expectations surrounding recruiting. 

I’ll keep my “unrealistic” high standards.  

Your standards are that we're underperforming based on what you would like and want us to be. But reality doesn't care about what you want.

Mavric's standards are based on what's reasonable considering what and where we are, namely, a team with five straight losing seasons and 20 years since a championship or top ten finish. 

One is rooted in actually looking at the situation, the other is rooted in wishful thinking. Neither is wrong, but one is, by definition, unreasonable. That's yours.

As for why I'm right about recruiting, well, isn't it obvious? Look at the past two decades! What have we accomplished with our barely "Top 20" classes? Nothing. Meanwhile, look at the teams who are winning conference and national titles. All had multiple Top 10 classes in the years leading up to their national title victories. 

Sorry, which is it. Conference or national titles? You can't say both and then only use the evidence for one.

Plenty of schools not recruiting top 10 classes every year but winning conference championships. 

but admittedly, I was wrong.

Ahh, this part was nice.