GBRFAN

 

 

This team is set up to do very well this season if we can find 2 big men. The talent level is the highest it has been in 30 years. We have 5 top 100 four star recruits, 1 top 150 player nearly a 4* and a couple of under rated guys waiting to breakout. There is no reason with this much talent we can't make the tournament... unless we fail to bring in a big man. That is enough to hold us back.

I agree....especially with your last paragraph. Compared to what we are used to seeing on the Nebraska team, this team has a LOT of talent.

 

Just need the final piece/pieces.

 

Really? So you're not trading the guys we have now for Erick Strickland, Jaron Boone, Mikki Moore, Terrance Badgett, Eric Piatkowski, Tyronn Lue, Alvin Mitchell, Venson Hamilton, Cookie Belcher, etc., etc., etc.???

 

Heck, even the 03-04 team of Dourisseau, Muhleisen, Conklin and Drevo would probably handle this team because they could go 6-11, 6-10, 6-9, 6-8.

 

The talent we have at the 1-3 spots is probably the best we've had in 20 years. But the overall talent is average at best.

 

You don't go 6-12 in the conference with the most talent you've had in 30 years. If that's true, Miles should absolutely be fired right now.

 

Did ALL those guys play on the same team?

I wonder what smurphy14's hopes are for Jurgens......

I'm still laughing and I've read your post 3 times. Not sure if it is more joy of the recruit or the funny post!!

 

I think we need to be as creative and aggressive in recruiting as possible.

 

But we should also have a monopoly on every recruit-worthy player in the state, because that's just our thing.

There is no reason we shouldn't be able to bring in the top 5 recruits in state every year if we want them. It should be a goal.

 

Guys - I get that it would make sense for us to dominate Nebraska, however there are two factors against that.

1) We haven't been dominating college football since the day these 17/18 year old kids were born

- so these kids aren't as programmed as kids 20 years ago were to dream about only playing for one school ... that being NU

2) Some kids have lived here their entire life and want to leave.

My point is it would be great to get 3 of 4, however there are other factors involved. We don't have to get so bent out of shape when Nebraska recruits give another school interest. Sometimes our staff knows this and that is why it looks like we back off someone that we all feel we should be giving more love.

Miles has a mess on his hands. I will be amazed if we finish within 5 games of .500 next year

Get ready to be amazed!!!

 

OK...I'm not an aficionado in college baseball. Can someone please explain briefly what you want to see in the RPI?

 

I understand it's a calculation or ranking based on who you have played and beat. And, the lower the number the better (or higher the ranking).

 

But, what is considered a really good RPI? What RPI do we need at the end of the year to get into the right position in post season play?

I'm not an expert but I would think that an RPI in the top 50 is considered pretty good. When it comes time to the NCAA baseball tournament, there are 64 spots for teams. Just like the basketball tournament, there are automatic bids for teams that win their conference (usually the end of year tournament), and at-large bids for the rest of the teams. The RPI is just one indicator for the NCAA to choose the at-large teams.

 

Several years back we were around 42 or 44 and that was board line to get into the tournament. I don't recall if we just made it in or just missed.

 

This entire "Callahan as an example that you can't recruit players from far away" fails to consider the rise of social media and the fact that kids are in constant contact with their friends no matter where they are in the country. I'm not saying the point is wrong, I'm just saying the world works differently today than it did 10-12 years ago. It's easier to combat homesickness now.

 

It's not about whether you can recruit them. It's about whether you can effectively retain them and get production from them.

 

You also have to consider that besides homesickness, there's a very real draw in a players' parents/friends/family being able to attend games in person. That's simply not easy for most people in CA or other far away states. So, while NE can pull players from those states, can they pull guys who are better than those available within 500 miles?

Personally, I think the 500 mile issue is a little overstated. It should be though more of as a 500 mile radius plus each state within the conference footprint. So, the approach should be more oblong than circular. Because you can tell kids in that corridor that they'll at least travel to nearby games 2 or 3 times a year (kind of what we used to be able to tell Texas recruits when we were part of the B12).

 

CM

This conversation has taken a turn since yesterday. You now seem to be discussing things with a tone that sits well with others. Your message is still on the opposite side of some, however discussion is flowing!!!

 

 

NJ and Florida were never foundational in Osborne's recruiting.

 

One doesn't need to be a Husker historian to understand that pieces from all over the nation were brought in to supplement the true foundation, which was built Nebraska and border state home grown talent.

The hype is insane. Doesn't mean he's not a great prospect or that he's not a great addition for a number of reasons. I just hate to see anther kid being set up to fail/disappoint.

 

I do think the idea of becoming Calabassas U is misguided. We've seen it before and building NU's foundation with recruits from 2000 miles away is not a great idea, even though individually they can be great contributors.

Not sure what you don't like about bringing in 4* talent. Even if we get 8 guys from CA we will still have a strong core of players from the 500 mile radius. Any Historian of NU football would need more than one set of hands and toes to count ALL the superstars that have come from CA / NJ / FL / TX during our glory years.

 

Not sure how you think the kid is being set up to fail / disappoint? I haven't heard a single person on this site say that we expect him to break every record and guide us to our first NC in 20 years. The talk that i'm hearing is that he could lead a crop of higher level talent to NU then what we have seen in the past 18 years. By the looks of it he is on his way to doing this - making him a success and appreciated. Will he also be an asset to the wideouts - Would assume so!!! however that will come with time.

 

This foundation that you dream of was mostly a result of cheap education & program success over a 20 year period - leading to a strong walk-on program. Those days are mostly over.

 

You should try to enjoy what is happening!!! If not, you may want to apply your energy in another avenue.

Mostly, I've already addressed the strawmen in your post.

 

You misunderstand the history if you think it was mainly about walkons. NU gave a ton of scholarships to Nebraska players. A huge % when you look in terms of population. Scholarship athletes from Nebraska were the foundation of NU's success.

 

As far as the hype goes, I've seen people refer to KJJ as being the best recruit landed since TO was coach. That's an insane statement, whether it specifically says he's the next Johnny Rogers or not.

 

I made a fairly innocuous statement along the lines of NU should cherry pick CA talent rather than invest in it as a foundational strategy and I'm attacked as though I slammed KJJr.

 

If people can't allow some discussion, even contrary opinions, on a msg board, maybe they should use their energy in other avenues.

 

No misunderstanding on the scholarships for MOST Nebraska players - they came here with a CHANCE TO GAIN a scholarship and if they climbed to the top it was given to them (no sooner....no later).

I would love to see some examples of your KJJ comment - again the overall trend has not been as you have stated.

Discussion is what this is all about, just not sure why you are so bent out of shape over us grabbing talent from a portion of the country that has a lot of talent.

NJ and Florida were never foundational in Osborne's recruiting.

 

One doesn't need to be a Husker historian to understand that pieces from all over the nation were brought in to supplement the true foundation, which was built Nebraska and border state home grown talent.

The hype is insane. Doesn't mean he's not a great prospect or that he's not a great addition for a number of reasons. I just hate to see anther kid being set up to fail/disappoint.

 

I do think the idea of becoming Calabassas U is misguided. We've seen it before and building NU's foundation with recruits from 2000 miles away is not a great idea, even though individually they can be great contributors.

Not sure what you don't like about bringing in 4* talent. Even if we get 8 guys from CA we will still have a strong core of players from the 500 mile radius. Any Historian of NU football would need more than one set of hands and toes to count ALL the superstars that have come from CA / NJ / FL / TX during our glory years.

Not sure how you think the kid is being set up to fail / disappoint? I haven't heard a single person on this site say that we expect him to break every record and guide us to our first NC in 20 years. The talk that i'm hearing is that he could lead a crop of higher level talent to NU then what we have seen in the past 18 years. By the looks of it he is on his way to doing this - making him a success and appreciated. Will he also be an asset to the wideouts - Would assume so!!! however that will come with time.

This foundation that you dream of was mostly a result of cheap education & program success over a 20 year period - leading to a strong walk-on program. Those days are mostly over.

You should try to enjoy what is happening!!! If not, you may want to apply your energy in another avenue.

I think post #124 will lead him to ban himself!!!!

 

 

Did someone mention Purdue? I am rewatching that instant classic right now...man what a battle!

Are you repenting or something?

Ha!

 

One of my buddies got a free 500 dollar bet from his bookie for referring a few friends, so that morning we are out waiting for the game to start and I think the line was around -8.5 NU. So, he decided to out that 500 dollar bet on NU and it started off great...but we all know how it ended.

 

I mean, it was a lock. The worst team in the Big Ten with a horrible staff and horrible players.

 

Well now we can stop blaming MR and start blaming your buddy.

Our next commit will be......

 

a running back!

But, But, But... if that happen then we will be a running team and i'm sure POB will transfer and KJJ will not come here because we will be running and we will have to start 15 new topics on "our new scheme"

 

Sockpuppet

Then go back to using the sock puppet in another manner and not as a way to mask your opinions as facts.

 

wow

wake up on the wrong side of the bed?

#TrustCoach

#Optimism

 

The hype around this recruit is approaching epic proportions. As is this renewed focus on recruiting California, which ended up being a misguided approach under Callahan.

 

 

p.s., both Valentine and Collins, just this year, were highly recruited guys who chose and excelled at Nebraska. Randy Gregory was highly recruited out of JUCO and chose Nebraska. Not to mention be Davis twins. The rewriting of history is breathtaking.

 

Every time I read one of your posts, this is what I imagine you look like

 

 

^^^My vote for POST OF THE YEAR!!!! ^^^

 

 

I don't agree with Dirk's premise. That is, I don't think Wisconsin says "We're going to run the ball a lot so we're only going to recruit three-star receivers." You always recruit the best WRs you can get. You just have a lot better chance of landing them with a passing offense.

 

However, I do think he's correct that we want to throw the ball a lot. And we're selling WR and QB recruits on that.

 

The big question is how effective will that offense be. As you know, I don't think it will be very effective - in fact, detrimental - with TA under center. I'm more hopeful with POB going forward. We'll see.

I agree with this. As for TA being under center, we'll find out. The recruits certainly won't impact the offense under him this season. However, the extent to which Nebraska has reliable RB talent remains to be seen. Will Ozigbo build upon UCLA? How do we replace Jano? Will Newby assert himself as more, will Wilbon or Trey Bryant make a charge, etc.

 

Tommy's mistake prone, and that has to get fixed, but he can also only run the ball himself so much in a game. And he's in an offense with some of the more dangerous and established receivers in the B1G now.

I'm tired of people blaming Tommy for being mistake prone. Among Riley's first year starters, TA has one of the best td to int and int per attempt ratios.

 

Did he make mistakes last year? Yes. Were they the same mistakes at the same or a lower frequency that most of Riley's QBs have made them? Yes.

 

So maybe it's not just a "we need someone less mistake prone" issue.

 

sorry noticed my point was already made.....

 

 

Bet we finish closer to #34 than #15...

 

i'll take closer to 15 - we were right in between those numbers last year and this class has so many reasons to be better than 2016.

- one more year to build relations with potential recruits

- our record

- Keyshawn factor

I forgot to include the sarcasm smiley apparently...

 

Yeah coming from you I thought that was an odd statement....You usually have a pretty good vision of things. I guess too much work this morning and not enough thinking about who was posting. My bad

 

Can always move them to DB - Nice to have good hands back there also!!!

Not true. Some guys could play either, but not all WR's are going to be able to play safety or corner. Not to mention defenders need a different mentality.

 

Not true - what is that referring to???

 

 

Right now we are 8th in Big Ten.

 

However, look at it when I go by average player ranking.

 

OSU 13 commits .9411

Nebraska 3 Commits .8900

PSU 4 Commits .8896

Michigan 6 Commits .8890

Iowa 6 Commits .8821

Northwestern 5 Commits .8654

Indiana 5 Commits .8603

Wisconsin 4 Commits .8700

MSU 2 Commits .8577

Maryland 1 Commit .8333

Illinois 2 commits .8323

Rutgers 1 Commit .7900

 

 

 

Keep it Rolling!!!!!!!!!!!!

OSU already has 13 commits?

 

How many of those will actually sign on the dotted line for them?

 

Wonder if some are placeholders for when a higher star kid shows interest.

 

If their average rating is .9411, there isn't going to be very many that are just place holders. That's 13 pretty dang good recruits.

 

Their only non-4* player is their kicker.

 

 

 

 

 

PS....don't want to derail the thread talking about OSU. Keep em coming Big RED!!!!!!

 

Also prefer to keep this about NU, however surprised to see Michigan at only 6 - wonder if the effect of turning kids away is starting to surface.....

Just remember if we fire Riley we lose KJJ.

Since the chance of us firing Riley are close to ZERO then the chance of losing KJJ remains at < 0.00001

Can always move them to DB - Nice to have good hands back there also!!!

Bet we finish closer to #34 than #15...

i'll take closer to 15 - we were right in between those numbers last year and this class has so many reasons to be better than 2016.

- one more year to build relations with potential recruits

- our record

- Keyshawn factor

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yale would more than likely beat Nebraska. A lot of senior leadership on that team.

 

To be fair, most of the teams in the Top 250 would be pretty likely to beat Nebraska.

 

 

This is silly -

 

Either you are saying that we fall somewhere around 126-150 in the country which would mean that MOST (about half ) should beat NU or you are saying that teams around 200/250 would be likely to beat us (which is not happening)

 

 

We were 6-17 against the Top 250 this year. So we had about a 26% chance of beating the Top 250 teams that we played. Meaning we were pretty likely to get beat.

 

Nice job spinning your words around to say something different....

 

 

Not really. You can speculate about what we might have done against the teams that we didn't play. Or you can look at what actually happened against the teams that we did play.

 

According to KenPom.com, we were #100. So we were slightly above the range that you gave that you would consider accurate for my statement.

 

But we also lost to Samford who is #224 (so we're actually 6-18 - I was assuming they were lower) so I don't know how you can say with much certainty that would would have beaten anyone in the Top 250. Last year we lost to Incarnate Word who was #228.

 

 

Anybody can speculate all they want, however that would just be a guess and that's all you can do if we don't schedule 249 games to play everybody else in the top 250.

 

You can pick an outlier to prove your point, however I could reply back with us beating a 2 seed that many picked to win the tournament. I would be making the same mistake that you did by finding 1 outlier that doesn't tell the whole season.

 

But you are right I can not 100% guarantee that we would have beaten xyz team in the top 250 unless we play them. You could also say the same on the opposite side about the 30 NBA teams - I think we are both smart enough to know that we wouldn't do well.

 

 

I didn't pick any outliers to prove my point. I noted our record against EVERY TOP 250 TEAM WE PLAYED THIS YEAR.

 

Now, you're assuming if we played some of the other teams we would win. That's possible. But that's pure speculation on your part since we proved we could lost to the #224 team in the country................

 

............. and beat a top 10 team in the country.

 

 

Yes. So did Middle Tennessee State.

 

But we're talking about what is "likely" to happen.

 

So we beat a top 10 team and lost to a low level team at the 225 range. Again these are outliers - every team has them every season. You choose to think it is "likely" to loss because you are more on the negative side and I choose to think it is "likely" to win because i'm more on the positive side.

 

But either way you keep basing your statement on one game out of a 30+ game season.

 

 

What part of 6-18 is basing it on one game?

 

Because you are using the the lowest team (#224) and then trying to make a 6-18 correlation off that one team like all the other teams that we played in that 6-18 group would be similar to #224 - While quickly forgetting that we beat a team that is in single digit rankings.

 

This conversation is silly - so keep posting but i'm done trying to get this thru to you. As stated earlier you tend to be a little too negative and I tend to be a little too positive - so i'm sure we will have many more chances to disagree.

 

No, I'm not making anything off of one team. I'm saying out of ALL THE TEAMS WE PLAYED IN THE TOP 250, WE WERE 6-18 AGAINST THEM. It's taking every game we played against teams that fit this description this year. I'm not cherry-picking anything.

 

You seem to want to infer that we would have beaten other Top 250 teams that we didn't play. That's entirely possible. But that's quite an assumption being as we proved we could lose to one of the worst of those teams.

 

OK I lied - I'm making one last post (my history of sticking to my word of being done was 100% until now)

Obviously if we played a sample of other teams in the top 250 we would win some - I hope you could agree to that. I also would agree that we would loss to some.

However, my point is this - compare your BOLD statement above

"I'm saying out of ALL THE TEAMS WE PLAYED IN THE TOP 250, WE WERE 6-18 AGAINST THEM"

and then go back to when this discussion started and compare the two statements - THEY ARE NOT EVEN CLOSE TO THE SAME. I'm not going to waste the time to go look for it and I know you wont either because you won't like the results, however it was something to the effect of "we would most likely loss to most teams in the top 250"

And yes you do cherry pick because after saying you don't cherry pick you finished your post with "cherry picking" ....."being as we proved we could lose to one of the worst of those teams".

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yale would more than likely beat Nebraska. A lot of senior leadership on that team.

 

To be fair, most of the teams in the Top 250 would be pretty likely to beat Nebraska.

 

 

This is silly -

 

Either you are saying that we fall somewhere around 126-150 in the country which would mean that MOST (about half ) should beat NU or you are saying that teams around 200/250 would be likely to beat us (which is not happening)

 

 

We were 6-17 against the Top 250 this year. So we had about a 26% chance of beating the Top 250 teams that we played. Meaning we were pretty likely to get beat.

 

Nice job spinning your words around to say something different....

 

 

Not really. You can speculate about what we might have done against the teams that we didn't play. Or you can look at what actually happened against the teams that we did play.

 

According to KenPom.com, we were #100. So we were slightly above the range that you gave that you would consider accurate for my statement.

 

But we also lost to Samford who is #224 (so we're actually 6-18 - I was assuming they were lower) so I don't know how you can say with much certainty that would would have beaten anyone in the Top 250. Last year we lost to Incarnate Word who was #228.

 

 

Anybody can speculate all they want, however that would just be a guess and that's all you can do if we don't schedule 249 games to play everybody else in the top 250.

 

You can pick an outlier to prove your point, however I could reply back with us beating a 2 seed that many picked to win the tournament. I would be making the same mistake that you did by finding 1 outlier that doesn't tell the whole season.

 

But you are right I can not 100% guarantee that we would have beaten xyz team in the top 250 unless we play them. You could also say the same on the opposite side about the 30 NBA teams - I think we are both smart enough to know that we wouldn't do well.

 

 

I didn't pick any outliers to prove my point. I noted our record against EVERY TOP 250 TEAM WE PLAYED THIS YEAR.

 

Now, you're assuming if we played some of the other teams we would win. That's possible. But that's pure speculation on your part since we proved we could lost to the #224 team in the country................

 

............. and beat a top 10 team in the country.

 

 

Yes. So did Middle Tennessee State.

 

But we're talking about what is "likely" to happen.

 

So we beat a top 10 team and lost to a low level team at the 225 range. Again these are outliers - every team has them every season. You choose to think it is "likely" to loss because you are more on the negative side and I choose to think it is "likely" to win because i'm more on the positive side.

 

But either way you keep basing your statement on one game out of a 30+ game season.

 

 

What part of 6-18 is basing it on one game?

 

Because you are using the the lowest team (#224) and then trying to make a 6-18 correlation off that one team like all the other teams that we played in that 6-18 group would be similar to #224 - While quickly forgetting that we beat a team that is in single digit rankings.

This conversation is silly - so keep posting but i'm done trying to get this thru to you. As stated earlier you tend to be a little too negative and I tend to be a little too positive - so i'm sure we will have many more chances to disagree.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yale would more than likely beat Nebraska. A lot of senior leadership on that team.

 

To be fair, most of the teams in the Top 250 would be pretty likely to beat Nebraska.

 

 

This is silly -

 

Either you are saying that we fall somewhere around 126-150 in the country which would mean that MOST (about half ) should beat NU or you are saying that teams around 200/250 would be likely to beat us (which is not happening)

 

 

We were 6-17 against the Top 250 this year. So we had about a 26% chance of beating the Top 250 teams that we played. Meaning we were pretty likely to get beat.

 

Nice job spinning your words around to say something different....

 

 

Not really. You can speculate about what we might have done against the teams that we didn't play. Or you can look at what actually happened against the teams that we did play.

 

According to KenPom.com, we were #100. So we were slightly above the range that you gave that you would consider accurate for my statement.

 

But we also lost to Samford who is #224 (so we're actually 6-18 - I was assuming they were lower) so I don't know how you can say with much certainty that would would have beaten anyone in the Top 250. Last year we lost to Incarnate Word who was #228.

 

 

Anybody can speculate all they want, however that would just be a guess and that's all you can do if we don't schedule 249 games to play everybody else in the top 250.

 

You can pick an outlier to prove your point, however I could reply back with us beating a 2 seed that many picked to win the tournament. I would be making the same mistake that you did by finding 1 outlier that doesn't tell the whole season.

 

But you are right I can not 100% guarantee that we would have beaten xyz team in the top 250 unless we play them. You could also say the same on the opposite side about the 30 NBA teams - I think we are both smart enough to know that we wouldn't do well.

 

 

I didn't pick any outliers to prove my point. I noted our record against EVERY TOP 250 TEAM WE PLAYED THIS YEAR.

 

Now, you're assuming if we played some of the other teams we would win. That's possible. But that's pure speculation on your part since we proved we could lost to the #224 team in the country................

 

............. and beat a top 10 team in the country.

 

 

Yes. So did Middle Tennessee State.

 

But we're talking about what is "likely" to happen.

 

So we beat a top 10 team and lost to a low level team at the 225 range. Again these are outliers - every team has them every season. You choose to think it is "likely" to loss because you are more on the negative side and I choose to think it is "likely" to win because i'm more on the positive side.

 

But either way you keep basing your statement on one game out of a 30+ game season.

 

 

What part of 6-18 is basing it on one game?

 

What is 6-18? If you are talking about Nebraska's record this year it was 16-18. One of those wins was against a current Sweet 16 team. Another was against a team that was picked to be in the Final 4 but failed to show up. We lost by 5 to Maryland who is also in the S16. Almost every team has a few solid b ball players now so it's not impossible to get beaten by a team 100 positions lower than you. On any given night the Huskers could have lost to some of the worst teams or beaten many of the better teams. I'm not saying we belonged in any post season event but we were no where close to being a #225 team

 

Thank you for saying this better then I could !!!

I'm thinking of an Andrew Luck. Or lots of other pro-style QBs. If by being pro-style, it means you can do three and five step drops, quickly see the field and plays developing, scramble just enough to avoid the rush, and complete passes to one of your multiple options at receiver, that's nothing but good for any offensive scheme.

 

It means you can also hand it off to your running backs, who will only benefit by having a passing threat at QB to keep the defense unstacked.

 

Luck would have huge passing games at Stanford. The next week they'd run the ball down the defense's throat. He could throw 18 or 40 times a game, depending on what the defense showed them. I don't think anyone stayed awake counting the run/pass ratios or asking themselves if they were a pass-first team. Either way, they had a great offensive line.

 

I'd prefer something like that.

+1 on this. If the QB can get the other team to not have 9 guys in the box then he has accomplished the first step in setting up the running game. Add in a O-line similar to Stanford and everybody on this board can be happy about our run stats, while still having a passing QB.