GBRFAN

Where did I say just calling running plays is what we needed. I said a elite running game. Not to mention that the numbers actually back up my stance that good running teams are more successful on the big stage then good passing teams.

Yes this is true. There is not a team in the country that wouldn't run almost every play if it would produce the desired results - there is less risk in running. However to put most or all your cards in running you better be dominate in what you do. Not many teams have that option (if any) with the new rules on scholarship #'s and $$$ to walk on. Look at NU in the 80's and 90's - we were dominate and it still wasn't quite enough to win it all for most of those years.

When have we ever had consistent top 10 recruiting classes GBRfan? We have to get better coaching to make up for our recruiting gap.

That's my point of why we can't be one dimensional and put all our cards into running the ball because those classes are hard to get at NU.

How do you know that we don't have better coaching? I believe we have the staff to get back to the top tier. I'm guessing you had the opposite figured out about 400 days ago.

No offense but that's the kind of thinking that got us in this mess. If we have a elite running game and defense we can win national championships. Alabama didn't it this year with a average passing game. Now before you start telling me they won the national championship because of their passing game think about why they had guys running wide open during the playoffs. Because both MSU and Clemson stacked the box to keep Henry from going wild on them. Still comes down to a elite running game.

not sure that "thinking" got us in this "mess". First of all, not sure what you mean by mess. Secondly, our talent being below top 10 classes has to do with "where we are". With that said, i'm glad that we have every player that we currently have on our roster. They committed to a program that is where it is and our staff will work to make them as good as they can be while looking to add new talent each year.

No offense but that's the kind of thinking that got us in this mess. If we have a elite running game and defense we can win national championships. Alabama didn't it this year with a average passing game. Now before you start telling me they won the national championship because of their passing game think about why they had guys running wide open during the playoffs. Because both MSU and Clemson stacked the box to keep Henry from going wild on them. Still comes down to a elite running game.

Sorry, Alabama did what they did because they had elite recruiting for the past 5 years - top 5 recruiting classes to be exact. Even in NU's best years we didn't have top 5 recruiting consistently and it wasn't because recruits thought badly of TO - it is what it is. We need to be elite with top 10-15 recruiting classes first and that will come from being balanced. As we get more W's then we can move to top 5-10 recruiting classes. Not sure why so many don't like the P word around here. Being one dimensional can only work when your talent is far superior to the opponent.

I'll give you defense but the passing game doesn't need to be elite by any stretch.

Hard to be elite at just one thing when you don't have top 5 recruiting classes year after year. We need to be solid at both running and passing to be elite on offense.

The days of us being more physically dominating then EVERY other team in the country are over and will NEVER be here again - doesn't mean we can't return to dominance or have a great offense.

Our weight program has been duplicated / Our ability to give out 100+ scholarships is gone / the cost of college tuition has increased to a point where many kids need to look at something different then walking-on.

We will be good again, however not by being elite at just one thing.

If we want to play for national championship we most definitely need a elite running game.

..... and defense and passing game.

People who want to rip on Bo have brushes ready to paint whatever picture they can whenever any dab of paint becomes available regardless of color or medium.

Bo likes to put out dabs of paint. "DABS" being plural.

 

For Purdue, we could have only had 2-3 wins and beating us would be a quality win.

 

OSU??? No. Purdue??? yes.

Quality win doesnt change based on the team.

 

Just cause a 2 win team beats a 3 win team doesnt make that a quality win.

 

 

I dont think anyone should have considered beating Nebraska a quality win.

 

Not so true. If a team hasn't won all season and they beat a 6-6 team the final week. I would guess everybody in the locker room would consider that to be quality.

I'd say that's about right. I'd give us more of a chance against Wisconsin and Iowa but they are both on the road.

 

I'd say 50 vs. Wisconsin and at least 40 if not 50 vs. Iowa - we completely dominated them everywhere but the scoreboard.

This post is right on. I would say 50 vs iowa and 70 against Indiana and NW - which would put us at 8 wins. I'm guessing we get 9 thou.

 

 

I have Najee Harris as the number 1 running back on 247.

 

No matter what, the point that Alabama already has a top RB commit is a valid point.

Yep, that is him...

 

Splitting hairs but Dylan Moses is a RB/OLB. Not that it matters. Cam Akers isn't coming to Nebraska regardless.

 

Did you just talk to him?

Can we start this thread over and begin with a statement in bold letters that we are not looking at 4 finalists for the AD job - it's not even open.

 

The problem with NOT rotating linemen or alternating individuals regularly is you end up in the place in the program we are at now. It began with Solich as the recruiting deteriorated, the depth disappeared. After about 5 years, the young guys were simply no longer good number 2s and were at best mediocre number 4s. We couldn't play them as the drop off was just too much and the games could never be securely put away in the win column until late in the fourth quarter. The lack of playing time for the back ups contributes to the decline as player development is stunted. You must put your 2nd and 3rd string guys in for realistic game action vs good competition so they can gain extremely valuable experience and the recognition of what it takes to play at championship level.

 

We won't play championship level football on a consistant basis until we have a second string good enough to compete with the teams we play week after week. The drop off to the third string can't be as much as the opponent's drop off to second string. Our thirds have to be learning as Freshmen and sophomores so they are ready to ones and twos as juniors and seniors. Game experience is quite valuable and critical to long term program strength.

 

If I recall correctly, Bill Snyder began his time at K State by a massive red shirt strategy of taking his better sophs and juniors and red shirting them rather than playing them. Alowing him the opportunity to play the young guys and back up seniors who were either not ready or never would be ready to compete at a winning level. He sacrificed in the short term (by losing more games in years one and two) to build more depth and experience and thereby allow the players to feel the effects of winning and success later on. It somewhat worked. Unfortunately, the fans in Lincoln are not nearly patient enough to view a couple sacrificial seasons in order to rebuild the program. As a result, for over a decade, Nebraska has been rebuilding instead of reloading. We must return to reloading. Play the younger guys or redshirt them. We must accumulate quality over time. Graduation and leaving early for the NFL is really our enemy at this point.

I agree with a lot of what you're saying, however, I do think the idea that we need a second string good enough to compete with teams week after week is an antiquated ideology, which is basically what I was getting at in post #33. We need better recruits that pan out first and foremost to create a strong line of starters, and getting to that point will help us build depth. IMHO depth is only built when your starters are up to snuff. I also think that scholarship limits, and other changes college football has seen in the last two decades, makes it more difficult to build that quality line of backups.

 

There's really only one program in the country right now capable of seemingly reloading every year and that's 'Bama. Same with USC in the 2000's and Nebraska in the 90's. I think, right now at least, being like 'Bama is an unrealistic goal.

 

^This is a great post in many ways. Who cares if your second string is the best 2nd string in the nation or Big Ten - if your first string isn't the best. Lets get one group up to being the best in the Big Ten and then start to think about depth.

Unless the person turns down the job we should hear something in the next 48 hrs.

If you look at Porter's posting history - it seems easy to read what he is trying to do.

 

Sorry if this has been posted. It looks like we have 32 seniors on the 2016 roster. How many are on scholarship? What are we projecting for a class size in 2017? I though I had seen the #17 for 2017, however that seems low with this many seniors....

http://dataomaha.com/documents/husker-scholarship-distribution

 

thxs!!!

Sorry if this has been posted. It looks like we have 32 seniors on the 2016 roster. How many are on scholarship? What are we projecting for a class size in 2017? I though I had seen the #17 for 2017, however that seems low with this many seniors....

All 3, because.

Perfect reply - This thread should have been locked after the "ice"

With Riley building a strong program here and the high probability that we will not have a spot for Frost here - why would that be a big loss?

Putting a wrap on this year.

 

Priority:

OT - Getting Farniok was a must. Could have used at least one more.

WR - Two small burners. Needed at least one big.

TE - Filled two spots.

DT - Really think we should have taken at least one.

DE - Got two guys. Not sure if either are difference makers.

 

-----------------------------------------

 

QB - 1 - PATRICK O'BRIEN

RB - 1 - TRE BRYANT

WR - 3-4 - JD SPIELMAN, DERRION GRIM

TE - 2-3 - JACK STOLL, DAVID ENGELHAUPT

OT - 2-3 - MATT FARNIOK

OG/C - 2-3 - BRYAN BROKOP, JOHN RARIDON, BOE WILSON

 

DT - 1-2 -

DE - 2-3 - BEN STILLE, COLLIN MILLER

LB - 3-4 - QUAYSHON ALEXANDER, GREG SIMMONS, PERNELL JEFFERSON

CB - 2-3 - DICAPRIO BOOTLE, MARQUEL DISMUKE, LAMAR JACKSON

S - 2-3 - JoJo DOMANN, TONY BUTLER

 

P/K - 1 - CALEB LIGHTBOURN

Mavric

Thanks for the info. Not only this, however all the other items that you have passed on to this board.

The only omission would be QB - would have to say that was our TOP PRIORITY and we hit a home run with POB

Texas is now a tough sale too many tier 2 schools that now look attractive (Baylor, TCU, etc..). If we get one or two great. California is good for the next 2-5 years.

 

Congrats to the new recruits and the coaching staff for closing strong. Still need more elite players but for year 1 ill take this class and be happy!

finished 25th, about what i figured, but still not nearly good enough, michigan and ohio state kicked our ass!

 

That was a bold statement. Did you expect it to be the opposite. There are only 3 schools that can say they did better then those teams (all coming from the talent rich area of the SE). We can say the same to Iowa and Minn - we also beat Wisc. Those are schools that we need to dominate first. Mich and Ohio St are currently on a different tier. Let's bring that discussion up after next season leading into the signing of the 2017 class.

 

 

I would like to see us get a minimum 1 from Texas, California and the SEC footprint every year.

Well, without Texas this year, 7 of our commits are from that area.

 

Not bad.

Not bad at all. Just like the idea that we are a national brand, and pulling one from each of those areas every year would solidify that.

 

Texas will be a tough fight going forward. Kids will stay close to home and play good competition where their parents can drive to most games. We will make up with old texas numbers by getting 2-4 every year from California. I think we will move our Texas effort into Louisiana and further east.

Riley under performs again, starting early?.........what a concept.

One of the top classes in the past 15 years. Your standards are questionable.....But what's new

 

 

Seriously, if you were a college coach who is well thought of I don't know how you don't jump to a NFL job. Kissing ass and putting up with the whims of 17-18 year old kids would grow old very fast.

 

What to go work where you have to kiss ass to guys that make 30-50 million and think their money is more important then you as a coach....

 

I would gladly take the over paid players of the NFL.

 

You don't deal with Mom and Dad and over inflated egos of 17-18 year old kids along with some programs not playing by the same rules. Everyone knows it's a job in the NFL. You have more freedom changing your roster from year to year. Yes, you have egos but, they know they have to produce.

 

Manzel has a huge ego problem. But, he sucks and so he sits on the bench. Mommy and Daddy aren't meddling in your decisions.

 

Both jobs have different issues - Coaches that are qualified for both just have to decide which ones they can and want to deal with.

Seriously, if you were a college coach who is well thought of I don't know how you don't jump to a NFL job. Kissing ass and putting up with the whims of 17-18 year old kids would grow old very fast.

What to go work where you have to kiss ass to guys that make 30-50 million and think their money is more important then you as a coach....

 

 

People are way too obsessed about the 1 scholarship thing. Having a better backup QB is worth the scholarship.

not really...........he will be of no value for 2016.....and then maybe only a year after that...taking up space.

 

I think that it would be of value to have a scout team QB who has D1 starting experience.

 

This makes complete sense. Our staff is probably looking at the 2016 benefits as much as the 2017 benefits (and possible 2018)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Who here ever said they would prefer a 3* that is undersized and slow over a 4* that is big and fast? NOBODY. 6'3 245 is fine for a senior in hs and he won't be needed to play this year so he focus on adding weight. Our biggest need from last year was a good pass rushing d end. That's what he is.

It's the whole "star" debate thing. Many argue that "stars don't matter", since, you know, most of our recruits are 3*. Well, often times, the difference between the 4 and 3* guys is that the former is bigger and faster. I've had fans argue me all day that a 4.7 40 in an RB or WR or CB is "just fine". I just have to push back, I guess.

 

 

Rex Burkhead says hello

 

Did Rex ever out run anybody? Not so much.

 

 

So you saying Rex wasn't a great back?

 

Probably not. I'd said he is very good. The knee injury seemed to have dampened his potential. Still 2nd or 3rd stringer @ Cinci. So no, not "great".

 

 

So Tommy Frazier must not have been a good QB since he didn't do anything in the NFL

 

I see you're just going to twist this thing all over the place and throw up straw man arguments. Rex was not "great", he was very good. I predict Collin may become good but not great--and he's too small for DE, would be better @ LB. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

 

 

Rex will go down as being a great running back, not elite but great.

 

He's the definition of NU football as a lunch pail worker

 

Nebraska will never get the biggest, strongest and fastest players. So when you say we need a Joey Bosa or Leonard Williams that's just not obtainable that's what people are trying to get you to understand.

 

Does this mean you are throwing in the towel? Suh, Gregory? We can do this!

 

 

One of you are being realistic and hoping for better - the other needs to throw the towel on this topic. Can we guess who is which?