Recruiting Ratings from 90s

[EZ-E]

Well comparing Pelini's first five recruiting classes to TO's recruiting classes from the 90s is unfair to begin with.

because the weather was warmer back in the 90's?

Yeah because the weather is the only reason a recruit commits to a school.

just wasn't sure what was so "unfair" about it...i'm sure people can dream something up to avoid admitting there's a gap in tallent/recruiting. I can think of 1...

...we can't pay our players like we used to back then

Oh come on man. Are you seriously comparing Pelinis first 5 years of being a coach to the best decade of college football (arguably) by any team. Are you that negative that you can sit there and tell me that this is a fair comparison? If i recall Osborne took over a championship calibur team. Pelini not so much. Lets see how we are ranked after having a coach for 20 years and win back to back national championships. If Pelini cant pull in a top 5 class after playing in a national championship, let alone winning one then i will say he cant recruit.

IMO you can almost take out Osborne and put in Pelini for the the first few years in the 90s. Averaging 9 wins cant win the big one classes anywhere from 15-20. Then we start playing for the NC and after arguably the best team in college football(95) he pulls in a very highly ranked class. I would hope that if Pelini would win the NC and beat the piss out of the other team 64-24 that we would have one of the top classes in the nation. Very unfair comparison. If you wanted a more fair comparison you could compare the first five classes, even then Osborne took over a program in alot better shape, and im not sure if they even rated classes back then.

I will also say with the inception of Rivals and all the experts they have come A LONG way since they started rating classes. With all the advances in communications almost no one flys under the radar (whitaker) anymore and most every 5 start pans out, more and more kids every dyear are being rated more accurately.

Very well said HuskerFowler. I would agree with absolutely everything that you stated in your post.

I dont see why all of these people are as negitive as they are. Had we gotten Peat our class would have jumped comfortably into the top 15.

 

[caveman99]

It was an interesting article to read, but I tend to put more stock into average stars and offers. I know it is hard for the author based on the timeline. I am planning on updating the average stars comparison soon, it had already shown Bo is recruiting to BCS Bowl talent, he is a bit short of BCS Title Game recruiting however. He needs to pull in classes like 2011 more often than not to get to that level. Getting A. Peat this year would have had them right there interestingly enough, staff needs to close a bit better.

 

[bshirt]

Cracked the top 5 twice in the best era of the program with arguably the best college football coach of all time? It's fair to say Nebraska has never been a recruiting juggernaut.

It's also accurate. Those dreaming up TO had top10 recruiting classes everywhere are living in a dream bubble fantasy world. In his 25 years as HC he had maybe a handful of those and that's it.

But it's something to b!^@h & whine about Bo, so.....

 

[beanman]

Cracked the top 5 twice in the best era of the program with arguably the best college football coach of all time? It's fair to say Nebraska has never been a recruiting juggernaut.

It's also accurate. Those dreaming up TO had top10 recruiting classes everywhere are living in a dream bubble fantasy world. In his 25 years as HC he had maybe a handful of those and that's it.

But it's something to b!^@h & whine about Bo, so.....

According to the article he had 5 classes rated in the top 10 by at least one service. Not sure how much stock you can put into these rankings back then or even now as we all know that this is an inexact science. At the very least you should be able to acknowledge that Tom had better talent (not elite, but very good) and was able to make up for the slight deficit in talent through running a unique system on offense that teams had a difficult time preparing for and playing hard-nosed intense football.

No reason we couldn't approach that again really, I just don't see it happening any time soon. It would be nice to see a top 10 class once every 5 years from Pelini but I'm not sure how you sell this program unless we start seeing better results on the field. Being competitive in every game would be a big step forward.

 

[Enhance]

don't post that - it goes against the "Osborne never had highly ranked classes/players" theory that is spewed so often to defend Pelini's classes.

Osborne "never" is a strong word - more often than not, he didn't have Top 15 recruiting classes.

There are many on this board who believe we should be recruiting in the Top 20 every year. But, the truth of the matter is Nebraska has never been a recruiting juggernaut.

 

[NoLongerN]

Loved the article. Great read. Appreciated that the writer didn't use the research to make any judgments. He just let it speak for itself. The "tone" in the writing was excellent. Lots of fans could learn a lot from not what was said but how it was said. I just wish folks would stop trying to win a damn debate and be a fan ... that applies to many threads outside this one.

 

[kchusker_chris]

I dont see why all of these people are as negitive as they are. Had we gotten Peat our class would have jumped comfortably into the top 15.

or #20 (1497). But don't let the facts get in the way of your argument. Carry on...

 

[kchusker_chris]

Cracked the top 5 twice in the best era of the program with arguably the best college football coach of all time? It's fair to say Nebraska has never been a recruiting juggernaut.

It's also accurate. Those dreaming up TO had top10 recruiting classes everywhere are living in a dream bubble fantasy world. In his 25 years as HC he had maybe a handful of those and that's it.

But it's something to b!^@h & whine about Bo, so.....

Regardless of the "fairness" - in his last 11 years TO had 4 top 10 classes, and 9 of the 11 were in the top 20. If we were recruiting like this, not many would be bitching. No one is looking for #5 classes, and we don't expect Nebraska to be a recruiting juggernaut. Just consistent top-20 classes. Personally, that is where I think we have to be to seriously contend in the big10 more than once a decade. Somewhere with an average ranking of 15 would be perfect.

(Emfinger had his 85' class #1)

1987 - #7

1988 - #24

1989 - #12

1990 - #10

1991 - #28

1992 - #14

1993 - #18

1994 - #20

1995 - #8-11

1996 - #2-6

1997 - #19

Last years class was a good start. This year's class wasn't bad. Had we filled out the 20 we would have been ranked inside the top 20. With a larger class next year I'm confident we'll find ourselves in the top 15. I think that is all that we can ask for. But those that pretend TO was winning with a bunch of classes outside the top-25 in order to rationalize Bo's lower ranked classes are living in a dream bubble fantasy world. It just doesn't add up w/ what we know. TO was a solid recruiter, and an even better evaluator of talent. Could he have won w/ classes averaging 25? Maybe, but he didn't have to because was pulling in top 20 classes with a top 10 class sprinkled in there every few years. Exacly what we all want to see from Bo.

 

[robsker]

how long until you can consider us "established" again? 9,10,10,9 wins is very similar to Osborne's run late 80's, early 90's. That can only be used also to defend Pelini though right I'd say we're established. And brief down periods (really it was just a few bad years though people make it out to be as bad as a 30 year bowless streak) are experienced at every program in the nation...from Alabama and Texas to USC, Michigan and Ohio State. It's part of football. In 06/07 these kids were 6th or 7th graders...Pelini should be able to sell "established" without a problem today.

I would say we are established now, but in Bo's first couple seasons, we were still trying to get our name back on the map, so we weren't really able to pursue the amount of high quality recruits that we can now. Bo was rebuilding a program while TO had an established program with 20+ years of consistently winning 9+ games.

Now I'm not letting Bo off the hook per say, but I just think it's a little unfair to conpare Bo to TO during the greatest run of his career.

really the only ones trying to compare the two are the people saying "Osborne never had top rated classes and still won" - when in reality he had top 15 classes most years, including some highly ranked players...hense the reason he won.

here's another question for you. do you think the Huskers were a "unique" program back then? (maybe for another topic). I saw the Huskers of the 80's/90's as very innovative. They did things differently...which is a big reason they overcome the lake of a top 5 class every year. They could take the 15th ranked class and win.

now, do you think we are a "unique" program today? and this means nothing about culture, fan base, etc. I'm talking on the field, coaching, etc. When I hear "multiple" to me that means we're just trying to copy a bunch of other programs. I thought we had a pretty unique defense...but that applied mostly to the Big12 style of play, and with this last year the defense lost some of it's luster.

I guess I personally don't see much unique about the Huskers...so where are we going to gain our edge? Won't be recruiting. Doesn't look to be coaching. Where's the innovation at?

The Huskers under TO were, generally, more talented relative to the top programs in the nation than the Huskers are now. TO had better recruiting and better and more walk-ons and had... as a result --- more talent to draw from (both in an absolute sense and relative to his competition) than does Pelini.

Also.... NU under TO, while closer to the nations elite talent wise (relative to Pelini's squad) NU was still well behind the top 5-6 teams most years (in terms of talent)... though not in all years (the glory years NU had talant alongside the elite). That said, TO also had teams that over-achieved and played with incredible passion. The Pelini teams are less talented, yet under-achieve and play with much less passion.

The TO teams were always relevant, nationally. Thus far, the Pelini teams have had no national relevance at all. Why? Three reasons --- TO had better talent to work with, got them to over-achieve, and got them to play hard. Perennial top 10 was the result. Pelini has less talent to work with, has not elicited from them what they are capable of, and cannot get them to play consistently hard. The result --- #3 - #5 in conference each year.

Yes, the TO teams also were unique in terms of offensive game-plan and that too contributed to NU's success. The Pelini team is not unique in any way.

 

[robsker]

Cracked the top 5 twice in the best era of the program with arguably the best college football coach of all time? It's fair to say Nebraska has never been a recruiting juggernaut.

It's also accurate. Those dreaming up TO had top10 recruiting classes everywhere are living in a dream bubble fantasy world. In his 25 years as HC he had maybe a handful of those and that's it.

But it's something to b!^@h & whine about Bo, so.....

Regardless of the "fairness" - in his last 11 years TO had 4 top 10 classes, and 9 of the 11 were in the top 20. If we were recruiting like this, not many would be bitching. No one is looking for #5 classes, and we don't expect Nebraska to be a recruiting juggernaut. Just consistent top-20 classes. Personally, that is where I think we have to be to seriously contend in the big10 more than once a decade. Somewhere with an average ranking of 15 would be perfect.

(Emfinger had his 85' class #1)

1987 - #7

1988 - #24

1989 - #12

1990 - #10

1991 - #28

1992 - #14

1993 - #18

1994 - #20

1995 - #8-11

1996 - #2-6

1997 - #19

Last years class was a good start. This year's class wasn't bad. Had we filled out the 20 we would have been ranked inside the top 20. With a larger class next year I'm confident we'll find ourselves in the top 15. I think that is all that we can ask for. But those that pretend TO was winning with a bunch of classes outside the top-25 in order to rationalize Bo's lower ranked classes are living in a dream bubble fantasy world. It just doesn't add up w/ what we know. TO was a solid recruiter, and an even better evaluator of talent. Could he have won w/ classes averaging 25? Maybe, but he didn't have to because was pulling in top 20 classes with a top 10 class sprinkled in there every few years. Exacly what we all want to see from Bo.

Excellent post. I agree with every point.

To get classes that are consistently ranked high... we need to win with what we have now. That has not been happening. NU needs to over-achieve (rather than under-achieve) and play harder than our opponents (rather than less instensly)... and win the conference sometime in the forseable future --- with the modest talent we have now.... before recruits of a high caliber (generally) will view NU as a viable option.

Until NU shows that it is a program on the rise... and playing above its talent level.... recruits will take a pass.

 

[The Dude]

Cracked the top 5 twice in the best era of the program with arguably the best college football coach of all time? It's fair to say Nebraska has never been a recruiting juggernaut.

It's also accurate. Those dreaming up TO had top10 recruiting classes everywhere are living in a dream bubble fantasy world. In his 25 years as HC he had maybe a handful of those and that's it.

But it's something to b!^@h & whine about Bo, so.....

Regardless of the "fairness" - in his last 11 years TO had 4 top 10 classes, and 9 of the 11 were in the top 20. If we were recruiting like this, not many would be bitching. No one is looking for #5 classes, and we don't expect Nebraska to be a recruiting juggernaut. Just consistent top-20 classes. Personally, that is where I think we have to be to seriously contend in the big10 more than once a decade. Somewhere with an average ranking of 15 would be perfect.

(Emfinger had his 85' class #1)

1987 - #7

1988 - #24

1989 - #12

1990 - #10

1991 - #28

1992 - #14

1993 - #18

1994 - #20

1995 - #8-11

1996 - #2-6

1997 - #19

Last years class was a good start. This year's class wasn't bad. Had we filled out the 20 we would have been ranked inside the top 20. With a larger class next year I'm confident we'll find ourselves in the top 15. I think that is all that we can ask for. But those that pretend TO was winning with a bunch of classes outside the top-25 in order to rationalize Bo's lower ranked classes are living in a dream bubble fantasy world. It just doesn't add up w/ what we know. TO was a solid recruiter, and an even better evaluator of talent. Could he have won w/ classes averaging 25? Maybe, but he didn't have to because was pulling in top 20 classes with a top 10 class sprinkled in there every few years. Exacly what we all want to see from Bo.

We were a perennial top 5 team in those days. Towards the top of the college football heap. Of course it was easier to recruit in those days, Nebraska had a better brand to sell. If I can quote you, "Ultimately winning brings in the recruits...it's a chicken/egg thing..."

Not to mention, Nebraska had probably the best facilities in college football, definately the best weight room. And it was easy to say "you want to play football on TV? Come to Nebraska". Those advantages no long exist.

No one's living in a fantasy world to rationalize Bo's recruiting. He just doesn't have some of the advantages TO had. That's not an excuse, it's just the way it is. Looking at the numbers without context is not a good way to get your point across.

 

[HuskerFowler]

Cracked the top 5 twice in the best era of the program with arguably the best college football coach of all time? It's fair to say Nebraska has never been a recruiting juggernaut.

It's also accurate. Those dreaming up TO had top10 recruiting classes everywhere are living in a dream bubble fantasy world. In his 25 years as HC he had maybe a handful of those and that's it.

But it's something to b!^@h & whine about Bo, so.....

Regardless of the "fairness" - in his last 11 years TO had 4 top 10 classes, and 9 of the 11 were in the top 20. If we were recruiting like this, not many would be bitching. No one is looking for #5 classes, and we don't expect Nebraska to be a recruiting juggernaut. Just consistent top-20 classes. Personally, that is where I think we have to be to seriously contend in the big10 more than once a decade. Somewhere with an average ranking of 15 would be perfect.

(Emfinger had his 85' class #1)

1987 - #7

1988 - #24

1989 - #12

1990 - #10

1991 - #28

1992 - #14

1993 - #18

1994 - #20

1995 - #8-11

1996 - #2-6

1997 - #19

Last years class was a good start. This year's class wasn't bad. Had we filled out the 20 we would have been ranked inside the top 20. With a larger class next year I'm confident we'll find ourselves in the top 15. I think that is all that we can ask for. But those that pretend TO was winning with a bunch of classes outside the top-25 in order to rationalize Bo's lower ranked classes are living in a dream bubble fantasy world. It just doesn't add up w/ what we know. TO was a solid recruiter, and an even better evaluator of talent. Could he have won w/ classes averaging 25? Maybe, but he didn't have to because was pulling in top 20 classes with a top 10 class sprinkled in there every few years. Exacly what we all want to see from Bo.

Excellent post. I agree with every point.

To get classes that are consistently ranked high... we need to win with what we have now. That has not been happening. NU needs to over-achieve (rather than under-achieve) and play harder than our opponents (rather than less instensly)... and win the conference sometime in the forseable future --- with the modest talent we have now.... before recruits of a high caliber (generally) will view NU as a viable option.

Until NU shows that it is a program on the rise... and playing above its talent level.... recruits will take a pass.

Not sure where your getting the 20 number from? 18 seemed to be the magic number. We were even going to turn Curry down.

According to Rivals we were

#22 in 2010

#15 in 2011

#25 in 2012

I see some classes in the mid to low 20s for Osborne as well before the big run. I agree with both of you thou, Carlfense is exactly right, we need to win with what we have now and once we do we will start getting better talent. If you look back at alot of guys TO tried to recruit there are some big names in there that ended up being very successful in the NFL, he was a very good judge of talent. I think Bo and CO are as well, its just going to take some time for people to realize that. I think a BCS apperance or 2 will do wonders.

 

[bshirt]

Cracked the top 5 twice in the best era of the program with arguably the best college football coach of all time? It's fair to say Nebraska has never been a recruiting juggernaut.

It's also accurate. Those dreaming up TO had top10 recruiting classes everywhere are living in a dream bubble fantasy world. In his 25 years as HC he had maybe a handful of those and that's it.

But it's something to b!^@h & whine about Bo, so.....

Regardless of the "fairness" - in his last 11 years TO had 4 top 10 classes, and 9 of the 11 were in the top 20. If we were recruiting like this, not many would be bitching. No one is looking for #5 classes, and we don't expect Nebraska to be a recruiting juggernaut. Just consistent top-20 classes. Personally, that is where I think we have to be to seriously contend in the big10 more than once a decade. Somewhere with an average ranking of 15 would be perfect.

(Emfinger had his 85' class #1)

1987 - #7

1988 - #24

1989 - #12

1990 - #10

1991 - #28

1992 - #14

1993 - #18

1994 - #20

1995 - #8-11

1996 - #2-6

1997 - #19

Last years class was a good start. This year's class wasn't bad. Had we filled out the 20 we would have been ranked inside the top 20. With a larger class next year I'm confident we'll find ourselves in the top 15. I think that is all that we can ask for. But those that pretend TO was winning with a bunch of classes outside the top-25 in order to rationalize Bo's lower ranked classes are living in a dream bubble fantasy world. It just doesn't add up w/ what we know. TO was a solid recruiter, and an even better evaluator of talent. Could he have won w/ classes averaging 25? Maybe, but he didn't have to because was pulling in top 20 classes with a top 10 class sprinkled in there every few years. Exacly what we all want to see from Bo.

We were a perennial top 5 team in those days. Towards the top of the college football heap. Of course it was easier to recruit in those days, Nebraska had a better brand to sell. If I can quote you, "Ultimately winning brings in the recruits...it's a chicken/egg thing..."

Not to mention, Nebraska had probably the best facilities in college football, definately the best weight room. And it was easy to say "you want to play football on TV? Come to Nebraska". Those advantages no long exist.

No one's living in a fantasy world to rationalize Bo's recruiting. He just doesn't have some of the advantages TO had. That's not an excuse, it's just the way it is. Looking at the numbers without context is not a good way to get your point across.

Exactly. Winning big brings good recruiting. Duh.

Too bad there's not numbers for 1973 through 1986 (where there's no NCs), huh? Even the average number of TO's last 11 recruiting years (w/all the NCs) is about "15" which is where we were just last year. Also, there's a big, big difference in the quality of competition in the BigXII & now Big10 vs the Big8.

In the Big8 days it was usually Oklahoma and possibly "one" other team having a good year (Colorado, Ok St, Missou) and that was it. KSU before Snyder was horrible. Iowa St & Kansas usually weren't much better. It's a far, far rougher row to hoe now.

Lastly, TO took over a program that won two NCs in it's previous three years. Bo took over a sh*t-hole. Winning "big" for the great recruiting classes is much, much more difficult for Bo than it was for TO. All things considered I think Bo has done a great job recruiting the couple of years. Especially with the emphasis on the big uglies.

We'll be just fine.

 

[EZ-E]

delete

 

[EZ-E]

I dont see why all of these people are as negitive as they are. Had we gotten Peat our class would have jumped comfortably into the top 15.

or #20 (1497). But don't let the facts get in the way of your argument. Carry on...

My bad. Miscalculated.

I am very happy with this recruiting class. If we would have gotten Peat and Shelton I would have been even happier.