Jump to content


Mavric

Admin
  • Posts

    102,368
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    461

Everything posted by Mavric

  1. .... as Washington State's are ........ not......
  2. I think Williams ends up higher than #40. He makes too many plays to not be on the field quite a bit.
  3. Upland, California native Jeffery Farrar is transferring from Washington State and says he's interested in Nebraska. Signed with Virginia out of high school (Class of 2014) but their admissions wouldn't let him in. Ended up as WSU as they were one of the few schools with scholarships still available. Originally had offers from most of the Pac-12 along with Michigan State and Miami, among others. Redshirted last year so he'd have three years to play after sitting out this year. Was a high three-star Athlete by both Rivals and 247. Played corner and nickel but could also play safety. Not sure if we have any interest but he is familiar with our coaches who recruited him a little in high school. Considering we've been after some JUCO DBs - and have a couple open scholarships, we might be looking. Rivals 247
  4. Same 11 as yesterday except Peters in no longer tied for 11th.
  5. Final Five: Arizona, Arizona State, Nebraska, Mississippi and Washington. I like our chances a little more with this list. Surprised that UCLA isn't on it. Oregon State and Cal fell out as well. Apparently he works out with Coach Cav's son so we have more of an in than I thought.
  6. I wasn't saying Osborne's defenses got that much worse. I'm also not trying to say what one team would do to another across the decades. I'm saying you can't say they gave up 14 ppg while last year we gave up 28 ppg (or whatever) so Osborne's defense was that much better. Too many things have changed. The best may have similar numbers but the shape of the curve (amongst many other factors) is likely quite different.
  7. Kind of interesting that they're all Juniors.
  8. On a strictly points per game basis? Yes. But - as we're discussion - I don't think comparing the numbers straight across tells you anything. And even comparing where the defenses were ranked national doesn't tell you a whole lot more. The game has changed significantly in the last 20-25 years, let alone the last 45.
  9. You can't compare scoring from the 70s to todays game and draw any conclusions. You need to compare that team to other teams from that generation. I tired finding CFB defensive stats from 1971, but none exist in aggregate. For example, the Alabama team we beat in the Orange Bowl that year only gave up more than 10 points 3 times and more than 20 once (to Nebraska), same as NU. Not sure they are "one of the best defenses in the history of college football". Agree with this. Not only are offenses completely different but the parity of college football now makes the overall schedule a lot tougher. Back in the 70s and 80s, we were simply physically dominant over most of the teams we played in any given year. Even the 1976 team - which was a "down" year by those standards, going 9-3-1 and 4-3 in conference - only gave up more than 14 points four times and averaged just under 14 ppg given up for the year. I am not so sure that we play a tougher schedule now. Nebraska played a tough schedule in 1971. We beat the teams ranked 2,3 and 4 in the final AP poll. Not saying certain teams we play are better. But the overall quality of the teams we play is better. Instead of having 2-3 really tough games and a bunch of teams that we beat simply by showing up, we - and everyone else - play 9-10 games against teams that *could* beat us if we don't play well. We're still expected to win most of those games but we don't have the third-stringers in by late in the third quarter.
  10. You can't compare scoring from the 70s to todays game and draw any conclusions. You need to compare that team to other teams from that generation. I tired finding CFB defensive stats from 1971, but none exist in aggregate. For example, the Alabama team we beat in the Orange Bowl that year only gave up more than 10 points 3 times and more than 20 once (to Nebraska), same as NU. Not sure they are "one of the best defenses in the history of college football". Agree with this. Not only are offenses completely different but the parity of college football now makes the overall schedule a lot tougher. Back in the 70s and 80s, we were simply physically dominant over most of the teams we played in any given year. Even the 1976 team - which was a "down" year by those standards, going 9-3-1 and 4-3 in conference - only gave up more than 14 points four times and averaged just under 14 ppg given up for the year.
  11. I don't think anyone's arguing that. But, again, that is comparing to an almost unattainable standard. We've consistently been a Top 20 - occasionally Top 10 - rushing team. We've produced four of the Top 10 rushers in Husker history - and this past year was basically the only year where at least two if not three of those players were splitting carries. It would be interesting to see the Football Outsiders stats for previous years but considering last year our rushing stats were down slightly from the previous few years I would think we'd be near the top in the previous 4-5 years as well. Again, I think it's easier to point out the negative when you don't like the overall results. But our rushing attack was a long ways down the list of problems we've had over the last decade.
  12. I guess if you want to make a distinction between "below average" and "bad". That would seem to be basically the same thing to me, at least in this context.
  13. I'm sure there is some relation there but the correlation doesn't seem to be very strong. The 10 Least Dependent states range for 4-50 on the Financial Condition rankings. The 10 Most Dependent states range from 3-45.
  14. Stats don't tell the whole story. But I doubt many people have watched enough of other teams to say we're significantly better or worse than anyone else. It's easy to say our line is bad, our linebackers are bad, our tackling is bad, or completion percentage is bad, etc., etc., etc. But the only way you can really compare to other teams is to look at the stats. Imperfect? Yes. Pretty good and the best method there is? Also yes.
×
×
  • Create New...