ObamaRocks91

I think the defense was the biggest change we have had in Bo's tenure, outside of coaching changes. We went to a 2 Gap, something some board members harped that we wouldn't do and bashed every mentioning of it. A scheme that I think worked out very well for us and went better than I had originally thought by end of season. We now have the talent to let these guys loose, rather than playing containment. When your that much smaller than the OL, its hard to bring pressure. Defensively, we are looking bright. Offensively, just unsure. HNN, I think you're a funny guy and I think you try to be level-headed but ultimately your love for the Huskers wins over what your logic tells you. Just a complete guess, but even though you're more of a Bo-supporter than most, I think you're far less delusional than most. With that said, I think you need to completely re-word the complete 100% incorrect bolded statement. It is both logically and factually flawed. Perhaps you should do some research on both Bo's traditional defense, our defense the second half of the year, along with our fan bases's perception of those defenses. Or hopefully you just had a typo in there that would make this whole thing a lot easier.

Farmer went to Michigan State's camp the week after committing to us. But he also didn't talk to a coach from another school from July until signing day. His dad screened his calls and didn't even let coaches talk to him as CN Red alluded to.

There is so much gathering from different conversations and trying to present it as one argument that I barely know where to start. But here are a couple points. 1 - 40 times at the combine really don't compare to recruit 40 times. At the combine, everyone is in the same, controlled environment being timed in an unbiased fashion. Unless a recruit's 40 time is from one of the HS combines, it's tough to know whether it's legit or not. 2 - The 40 is an easy-to-understand number and people think they know what a "good" 40 time is so it gets talked about a lot. Actually, it's one of the least-meaningful stats out there. WRs and DBs can help or hurt themselves depending on their 40 time. But unless it's quite a bit different from expected, it's not that remarkable. I don't think many expected QE to be the 11th fastest WR at the combine, so it stands out. 3 - The 40 really tells you nothing about the football skill for most positions. What good does it do to have one OL run 0.1 faster than another OL? Lineman makes basically no difference. LBs, not much. RBs, maybe a little but again, unless it's way high or low, not much. QBs maybe a little but not much. unlees it's really fast. 4 - The other reason recruit 40s don't matter as much is because they're still in all different phases of physical development and weight training. By the time they get to the combine, most are basically done growing and have had 3-5 years in a college weight program. When a kid is 16-17 years old, coaches are still trying to project how much more he'll develop, grow and adjust to not being the best player on the field. By the time they get to be 22-23 years old, most of that has been figured out and they have a lot game film to evaluate against similar competition. To your preface, no, this is all taken from one thread in a span of about 10 posts. Then I'm comparing those posts to ones in this thread. It's a very simple comparison between two threads, don't get overwhelmed. As for the rest of our points, I largely agree but have never argued against most of those points. But regarding point #4, if that is how you feel, then I hope to see you start calling out people if we get a 4 star CB from Florida who runs a 4.35. I want to make sure I see the board's newest mod say: "stop it right now, guys, we don't know if this was in a controlled, unbiased environment! Also, he is in a different physical development stage of some of the other guys. This means absolutely nothing."

I'm totally in the camp that says Quincy's 40 time was a big deal! That is rare and should definitely help his draft status - no where have I ever said different. But also, if we get a recruit who is 180 pounds and runs an electronic timed 4.9, I think it's ridiculous that I get absolutely demolished for saying that is concerning to me. I have been on the same side the whole time: I think 40 time is something that can help evaluate a player and a guy who runs a 4.4 at 225 pounds will generally be a better player than a 165 pound guy who runs a 5.4 40.

For perspective the B1G best wr "prospect" according to many, Allen Robinson, ran a 4.61. I just want to get this straight: When I bring up a 40 time for a recruit and explain how it concerns me because it's far slower than the average, you and others exclaim "The 40. Most overhyped worthless thing there is." -Paul Crewe. "Coaches and scouts only care about production, a 40 time means absolutely nothing." BUT, when that 40 time is in favor of a Nebraska player, it's the greatest thing ever!!! "He is totally going to get drafted because of his 40 time!! He draft stock is rising!!! Production means nothing, it's all about that speed!" Just makes me laugh. Now everyone (Mavric, PC, RRJRW), go ahead and tell me how I'm wrong, which will likely require a 100% complete opposite argument you have previously made to tell me I was wrong in another dispute. Just make sure you keep good notes to ensure you know which side of the argument you are on this time around.

Feel free to post the statistics you have to prove this happens more to us than anyone else. I'll even make it easier for you (since I know you have no such statistics): Simply go through the decommits we had this year and explain why they decommitted. I won't go as far as AF did, but Mavric, do you think the staff could put more effort into bringing kids in for OVs during the season. By my count, we had 16 uncommitted 2014 recruits come in during OV's during our home games. We are allowed 56 total throughout the entire cycle. In your opinion, would you at least like to see that number improve quite a bit, considering our game day atmosphere is generally considered our #1 selling point to recruits? What makes you think they're not putting effort into it? Do they have direct control over when and if kids can visit? The scheduling of early games hasn't helped much in that regard either. I will also add that the administration needs to make sure they are doing everything they can to support the coaches in recruiting. Two lowly paid recruiting staff positions and access to private planes at the end of recruiting season is nice, but we can and should do more to help the coaches with what is already a difficult task. How many other coaching staffs have to canvas the whole country and dig for diamonds as much as ours do? To criticize their effort when they already have to work harder than other major programs is ridiculous. Maybe I shouldn't have used that word and gone with strategic decision making. Someone asked Els "during the Wyoming game, why did you have only 3 OV's?" He said, "well we have 8 home games, so we want to spread them out a little more." That weekend went on to be one of the most highly attended weekends. That is a problem that 16 uncommitted OVs attended our home games, in 8 home games. If you don't want Bo fired and think he is the right guy for the job, I'm fine with that although I don't completely agree. But even if you feel that way, you're not required to think every single thing he does is the 100% best way and he is beyond criticize and isn't allowed to be improved. As far as your AD support. I just can't help but laugh at this that everyone blames SE. Bo has been HC for 6 years. 5.5 of them, TO was his AD. Now after 8 months on the job, SE is getting blamed for the last 6 years of lack of administration support. Sure, those 2 low paid recruiting jobs were just posted and may not be enough, but those are 2 MORE THAN TO OFFERED TO BO. And there are going to end up being closer to 6 or 7 for the recruiting department. That is 6 or 7 more people that EICHORST (in 8 months) made available to Bo than T.O. did in 6 years.

Feel free to post the statistics you have to prove this happens more to us than anyone else. I'll even make it easier for you (since I know you have no such statistics): Simply go through the decommits we had this year and explain why they decommitted. I won't go as far as AF did, but Mavric, do you think the staff could put more effort into bringing kids in for OVs during the season. By my count, we had 16 uncommitted 2014 recruits come in during OV's during our home games. We are allowed 56 total throughout the entire cycle. In your opinion, would you at least like to see that number improve quite a bit, considering our game day atmosphere is generally considered our #1 selling point to recruits?

I was not referring to your second statement and my point is closer to the first statement. Again, I agree with what you're trying to point out, but I was honestly just curious what discipline considered r = .3 as "strong" as you stated. If all those social scientists out there consider that strong, well, ok. I will take your word for it.

Just to add further evidence to KJ's point: For the 2012-2013 season, I took a look at the correlation between wins that season and recruiting rankings (total points according to Rivals) for 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2012 [the five classes of players who were a part of the 2012-2013 season]. For 2008: r = .39 For 2009: r = .36 For 2010: r = .35 For 2011: r = .42 For 2012: r = .44 All of those are strong correlations: teams who recruit well also win more games and are ranked higher as a result. Furthermore, teams who recruited well in the past tended to recruit well in the future too; all the intercorrelations between the recruiting ranks were extraordinarily high. Not eye opening information. Isn't r>0.6 usually considered strong correlation? Depends on your discipline. To me, anything > .30 is strong. BBB12, overall I agree with the overall point you're trying to make because unless someone is completely oblivious to how the world works, they can't argue against it. But please tell the the discipline in which you consider an R^2 as "strong." I'm literally dying to hear what industry or company is using that in their analysis so I can drop my net worth on shorting that stock.

Not full. We are at 25 now, but the effective number after you take off Stewart and Lockhart, we are only at 23. I think 26, with the slight possibility of 27, is the number we be at. So we still have room for 3 or maybe 4 more if the last guy was someone like Blair or Frison.

Eric Lee rode to the visit with Anderson, so you would think Lee will be in his ear for a portion of the 9-11 hour trip back to Colorado.

I hope you guys realize RR gets his information from this board. He isn't apart of any pay sites and has 0 inside connections. He pays attention to twitter really well and comes on here for virtually all of his info. So please don't use him as a source - just tell him hello since he is here right now checking for updates hoping he wasn't wrong for jumping the gun on HM.

He also follows Denzel Ward, Deion Hallmon and some of the other targets who are unlikely to commit. So it could be something to read in to, but just realize there are others, too.

K-state bound.

I'm not saying a good 40 time makes a good player and a bad 40 times makes a bad player. But 40 times help evaluate a player's ability and how it will translate on the field. Again, I'm sure all you are really brilliant and the people who run NFL teams are the ones that are wrong. I can't argue with incompetent, uneducated, and uninformed.

Well, I have never seen a WR run a 5.0 40, so the 40 time shows some threshold of a player's ability. If Chris Johnson runs a 4.6 instead of a 4.24, he doesn't get drafted and certainly doesn't run for 2000 yards in an NFL season. No, a 40 times doesn't matter by itself, but it shows a player's potential capabilities and how that can translate on to the football field. So who gives a crap about 40 times? Every NFL coach, scout, GM, owners, people who evaluate players for a living - exactly what we are doing here, evaluating a player.

Yes, the 3 coaches who offered him love that speed!

It was electronic timed at a SPARQ combine last summer. I suppose you flew down to Louisiana with your 40 electronic machine timer and recorded a different time? What did you clock him at? Since there is no way he increased his speed over the course of the year at all. I clocked him at the same speed your brain apparently works: 0. You realize that kids just don't drop .4 seconds off their 40 just by getting 6 months older and doing a few squats in the weight room. Of course he can get faster, but it is quite marginal. A dramatic improvement would be -.1 or -.15 seconds. So let's say he worked his ass off, matured a little bit, that still puts him at the 4.77 range. Look, there are things to like about him. He uses his body well, which isn't always guaranteed for all big WR. He seems to have pretty good hands, but we don't know that for sure because WR isn't going to put drops on his highlight film. But no one can right minded put his speed or athleticism on the top of this kid's list.

It was electronic timed at a SPARQ combine last summer. I suppose you flew down to Louisiana with your 40 electronic machine timer and recorded a different time? What did you clock him at?

What do you like about his athleticism? Serious question. He runs an electronic timed 4.87 40, which is exactly the same time as a current 290 pound DT commit. His vertical, as measured at a combine is 29.4 inches. His shuttle time is 4.4 seconds, which great if you're a 330 pound offensive tackle entering the draft. You can like his size all you want, but don't sit and tell me you like his athleticism when he will honestly be one of the least athletic kids on the entire team - including offensive lineman from small town Nebraska.

Have you watched the film? I already know the answer if you believe he could be a DB. He has terribly slow feet, change of direction, and unfluid hips. He runs a 4.87 electronic timed 40. At WR, at least in the red zone he can run down 15 yards and try to out jump the CB. Absolutely no chance at DB for him, though

Bobby Petrino. Appears to be close to being a done deal

The folks in Central Texas that have been on top of Mosley and Waz from the beginning have told me it would be a surprise if Mosley ended up in Lincoln. They say he was close to Joseph and that's what made the distance from home less of a factor. Mosley has set up an official visit to TCU on January 24. Baylor, Oklahoma and possibly Texas A&M will be players too. I'm just passing along what I've been told. From 247 analyst. http://nebraska.247sports.com/Board/142/Latest-with-Trai-Mosley-24709384/1

I wouldn't say we are where we were at this time last season. Exactly one year ago today (Jan 6, 2013), our average rating by the 4 services was 15. This year its in the mid-to-upper 30's. Last year on this date, we had 12 4-star recruits (when counting kids rated 4 star by one or more services).