jmfb

Bill Snyder does more with less over the long haul than any DI coach I know of Terrible facilities Low Population state known for basketball In middle of nowhere- not even a good local airport KSU had zero positive football history prior to Bill Snyder Snyder rarely has recruiting classes ranked above about 40th, usually in 50s, 60s even Consistently winning season Lots of top 20 and top 10 teams Total respect for the man, turned that program around twice

Guy said: Osborne teams were flat out road killed on a fairly regular basis by Oklahoma and our ranked opponent in the bowl game Again- Im just disagreeing based on the outcomes of the games: NU lost 3 bowl games in 25 attempts by 20 or more points- they won 3 by more than 20 NO losses above 20 points in Bowl games during TOs first 15 seasons

By comparison, yes, the number is small. But, this does not change the facts - he lost some bad games. It doesn't matter how often they happened in comparison to someone else. If someone asked you "was a TO team beaten badly," the answer would have to be YES. Again, there's really no need to bring Pelini into this. Nobody is comparing the two. Refer to part one of my post. Negativity harnesses a powerful voice, even if it is a minority. But, nobody here is trying to discredit TO. We're just trying to provide a clearer picture of his tenure as head coach. It wasn't always blue skies and red roses. The number of games does matter If someone coached 100,000 games and had 2 losses over 31- that would be pretty insignificant especially if say he won 99,998 of the rest of the games Context- and the bigger picture matters OTOH if you get blown out by 31 say 5 times in 94 games or 15 times beaten by more than 11 in same 94 games- it's a totally different environment- situation. Of course most reasonably informed people are going to judge those 2 situations much differently. There was little comparison. I dont recall any booing of TO or the team. Yes as fans some of those losses were crushing in TOs day- but I dont remember anyone I knew saying- " we would be better off with coach X at the helm". It never got to that level and like today- I was no sunshine pumper then, we were realists that figured the moons would eventually align, the bad breaks couldnt consistently happen and instead of being top 10 every year, NU would win that elusive National Championship., I was confident we would be deserving of several before TO left. Too many close calls not to. Guy said: Osborne teams were flat out road killed on a fairly regular basis by Oklahoma and our ranked opponent in the bowl game I just disagree with that In 25 years OU beat NU by 20 - 5 times one in 5, so depends on what your definition of road killed on a regular basis is. NU also beat OU by more than 20 points 5 times under TO. so 5-5 on that one. NU under TO lost just 2 games by more than 31 in 307 attempts while consistently being ranked in top 10. NU won, beat plenty of ranked OPs and was competitive and won plenty of Bowl games during that tenure as well. Enough to help fans understand NU was close and relevant. At that time OU was often times ranked 1,2,3, which is important Context is important NU of today is getting boat raced by teams that arent ranked in the top 5, much different deal than in TOs day

jmfb you seem to be arguing to try and get Guy, myself and whoever else to believe something that I don't think there is an argument about. TO record is not in dispute. Nor, is the fact that he had way fewer bad games where his teams got outclassed or manhandled or beaten by a certain number of points. It is not about statistics or a statistical analysis of TO vs. BP vs. BC. I know you are very fond of the stat part of the game you bring them up a lot. The whole argument was about someone saying that TO never got manhandled by teams. Which is not true. Yes statistically we would say that it was way less than BP or BC. I would even say significantly less. But he did lose some games by a lot of points and was outclassed in some games. That is the point. My point is out of 307 games, the number is so tiny- it is nearly insignificant, not important, a true aberration when put in context to all the great stuff happening over the long haul and even within those same "down" seasons. The greatest coaches of all time- didnt win 100% of their games and out of 307, one could expect a small insignificant number of not so great games The BP apologists like to bring up TOs "bad" seasons to make themselves feel better- when put into context, no comparison at all. To think TO was disliked by a majority of fans, like some would lead us to believe- was never the case at any time during his tenure. Man you are still arguing to argue. I don't recall anyone saying TO was disliked by a majority of fans? Personally I think he is top 3 all time college FB coaches. Comparing where Bo Pelini and BC were in relation to TO Thats why it was brought up- to show that hey BP wasnt that bad look even TO had a couple "bad" games. Many here werent alive or attending games at that time- dont know or dont understand the context.

I guess the question is if you knew that "matter of time" would be 20 seasons, would you have been cool with that? Again, and hopefully for the last time, I can assure you that the Tom Osborne years were far more preferable than the Callahan/Pelini years, but some of the Osborne memories around here aren't accurate enough for some of the claims folks are making. TO had some close calls for National Titles even early in his career- 78 and 79- 79 one play from playing in National Title game- 2 plays from being undefeated As to 2 near misses, no I wasnt celebrating either- I was disappointed we were so close- but I appreciated we were good enough in the big picture to be that close I had ZERO problem with 20 years, because we were often times in the hunt, even very late in the season Lots of near misses, bad breaks, bad calls etc- it was going to happen, just a matter of time I would be more than happy to wait 20 years again, no problem at all- if we were consistently top 10 and doing a bunch of near misses like TOs teams did in his day. By my count about a dozen near misses on National Titles out of 25 years of coaching, TO I went to almost every home game in TOs career, Bowl Games, 3 KO Classics, worked in a big Corp office, was around lots of HS football coaches and sat amongst very long time season ticket holders during that era. A tiny minority were anti TO, nothing like the waves that came out against BP and BC- not remotely close. In those days I never went into a game thinking we would most likely lose or get blown out. As to 2007 vs 1973- yes NU was on top in 72, but Bo inherited some pretty well ranked recruiting classes, maybe better ranked than what TO got Taking over from a legend like Devaney wasnt easy- TO lost his DC too As to "never happening" Never means always NO coach had a "never" career. Extremely rare- aberration- insignificant statistically/historically would be spot on accurate. People ARE making comparisons, that is why this was brought up. TOday very few reasonalby informed people would scoff at an NU coach who consistently finished in the top 10, was consistently in the conversation, relevant, graduating players and repping the University well. Crazies dont count.

jmfb you seem to be arguing to try and get Guy, myself and whoever else to believe something that I don't think there is an argument about. TO record is not in dispute. Nor, is the fact that he had way fewer bad games where his teams got outclassed or manhandled or beaten by a certain number of points. It is not about statistics or a statistical analysis of TO vs. BP vs. BC. I know you are very fond of the stat part of the game you bring them up a lot. The whole argument was about someone saying that TO never got manhandled by teams. Which is not true. Yes statistically we would say that it was way less than BP or BC. I would even say significantly less. But he did lose some games by a lot of points and was outclassed in some games. That is the point. My point is out of 307 games, the number is so tiny- it is nearly insignificant, not important, a true aberration when put in context to all the great stuff happening over the long haul and even within those same "down" seasons. The greatest coaches of all time- didnt win 100% of their games and out of 307, one could expect a small insignificant number of not so great games The BP apologists like to bring up TOs "bad" seasons to make themselves feel better- when put into context, no comparison at all. To think TO was disliked by a majority of fans, like some would lead us to believe- was never the case at any time during his tenure.

I think most fans today would be thrilled with consistent top 10 finishes AND being mentioned in the National Title hunt even in "down years" In the years TO lost- he also beat ranked teams/won Bowl games AND was ranked in the Top 10. Most of us would be thrilled with those results. I for one knew it was just a matter of time before TO got his National Titles. The magic/freaky bad luck like the 79 season, Sooner Magic, Penn State bad calls, Florida State miracle/bad calls was eventually going to run out and NU was going to win it all, just a matter of time. Knocking on the door too many times to NOT eventually being able to claim a National Title. The sample size for TO was 307 games- the sample size for Pelini was 94- LOTS more chances to have an abberation in 307 and even then it was tiny compared to others. Have to have something to compare it to. Of course not perfect record, no one wins 100% of your games. There are millions of lightning strikes a day, but only a tiny handful ever hit anyone. Just like Osbornes "bad years or bad gaames" were tiny enough when you consider what average means- a Pelini or Callahans records. Top 10 is Top 10 doesnt matter how it was done then and now you are one of the Top 10 teams in DI football or you arent TO never got 50,60 70 points dropped on him by 4-6 loss teams or embarrassed himself in front of the fanbase- that is what got Pelini/Callahan booted. Beat some ranked teams, lose to good competition from time to time- not getting blown out, blow out weaker teams, be in the hunt, be relevant and dont embarrass the University and you get to keep the job. TO did that, others didnt. Quoting a season as an example of a failure when the team lost 2 games to top 5 opponents by less than a TD in the last seconds of the game- being 2 plays from an undefeated season- ISNT a bad season. Its a very good one- one most fans were very proud of. I for one LIKE being in the National hunt late, even if we lose. Osborne was never doubted by the majority of fans like Beck and Pelini- you are making a comparison there Were there some loud mouths who knew very little about the game who made some noise? Sure, very small- including my college roommate who never played the game, never got the game and knew just enough about NU football to carry on a conversation- went to a handful of games and was very vocal. The vast majority of the long time season ticket holders supported and appreciated TO. During that time the people I knew who really understood the game and College football were behind TO 100%. I dont think that was the case with BP or BC

Well technically if you take Tom Osborne's first 7 seasons -- the number of seasons in the Pelini sample and four more than Callahan: 1973 Tied unranked Oklahoma State Lost to #12 Missouri Lost to #3 Oklahoma. Nebraska never snapped the ball in OU territory. (that was a great OU team) Finished #7 in the Nation Also beat #15 Kansas Beat #8 Texas in Cotton Bowl 1974 Lost to unranked Wisconsin Lost to unranked Missouri Lost to #1 Oklahoma 28 - 14. Finished #8/9 Beat #15 Florida in Sugar Bowl 1975 Lost to OU 35 - 10. Nebraska was ranked #2 and OU #7. NU came out jittery and gave up six turnovers Lost to ASU in the Fiesta Bowl on another turnover. NU ranked one spot ahead of ASU. Lost to #1 Oklahoma Beat OSU- the Fiesta Bowl Winner Finished #8/9 1976 Tied unranked LSU Lost to #17 Missouri Lost to unranked Iowa State Lost to #8 Oklahoma (but it was close) Won the Bluebonnett Bowl Iowa State ended up ranked #19 Beat #14 OSU NU ended up ranked #7/9 1977 Lost to unranked Washington State, four fumbles including 3 inside the WSU 10 Beat #4 Alabama the next week. That was pretty nice. Lost to unranked Iowa State Lost to #3 Oklahoma 38 - 7. Another pattern of turnovers and penalties in a big game meltdown. Won the Liberty Bowl. Ended up ranked 10/12m yet another top 10 ranking by TO Beat #2 Alabama- loudest NU game Ive ever attended 1978 Lost 20 - 3 to #1 Alabama Beat Oklahoma! Lost to unranked Missouri Lost to Oklahoma Lost to #14/15 Missouri Was in National Title Hunt until last conference game Finished #8- another top 10 finish 1979 Lost to Oklahoma, ranked below us Lost to Houston, ranked below us (That was a promising season, but losing the last two games of promising seasons was wearing thin.) Lost to #3 OU by 17-14 late Sooner Magic Lost to #5 Houston on TD in the last 12 seconds Beat #20 Missouri NU ended up #7/9- another top 10 finish NU was 2 last second plays away from another undefeated season In the National Title Hunt until last conference game It got better for a few seasons. Then it got worse. Then it got incredibly great. 25 years into it and Tom Osborne had a legendary career. But there's no need to pretend that Tom Osborne only lost to better teams and never got out-coached. You cite these seasons and games, but not the whole story Yet NU in those seasons beat some very good teams and lost to some very good teams NU ended up being ranked in the top 10 even in those "bad" seasons- something Pelini or Callahan couldnt do in their very best seasons Im very satisfied with finishing in the top 10 every year, beating ranked teams every year and being mentioned or competing for National titles- even in "down" years Something Pelini or Callahan werent able to do TOs list of "failures" within the context of coaching 307 games is minsiscule- especially when compared to the failures of a Pelini or Callahan Pelini or Callahans very best seasons- might compare is you really stretched it- maybe to the very worst of Osbornes 25 years- think about that When you coach long enough- youre going to have one of those years where everything goes against you- a true abberation- not a pattern Match NUs recruiting rankings in those years against the teams above them in the polls, still was able to compete and be a top 10 team. NU was still in the conversation- relevant. We arent now Im guessing Pelini/Callahan would love to have any one of TOs worst seasons and top 10 rankings

I guess the end result is it happened once every 153 games So when it did happen, you knew it was a complete aberration- like when someone getting hit by lightning- not common place like Bos teams Under TO I never thought to myself- well it looks like we lose this one by 30+ With Bo- all the meltdowns his teams had- I felt that way often- Here we go again are we going to get blown out yet again? You just never knew

Im saying what happened 2 times in 307 games is inconsequential A true abberation- like getting hit by lightning- just totally out of character Not like Bo where it was common place and often times to teams that werent that great- not National Title contenders like TOs

Some bad losses? 2 losses by 31 or more in 307 - games, 25 years isnt worth talking about ONCE every 153 games BO OTOH- 5 times in 94 games- ONCE every 19 games or so Same for 17 losses by 11 or more in 307 games- thats about 1 in every 20 games compared to Bo which was 1 of every 6 games Like you- I dont agree that an 11 point loss is a blowout

I didn't take it as you comparing the two eras either so I'm not sure where the ire from others is coming from. The truth is this - some of TO's teams did get beaten up on and badly. I think the big difference we can all agree on is that many of TO's worst losses came at the hands of very good teams. The losses weren't to a 7 win team to the tune of 70-31. They were to big time opponents. In fact, only one loss of 11 points or more during TO's time came against an unranked Oklahoma. Here's some stats gathered by CleetusVanDamme on 247sports. Losses by only 10 points or more. 45-10 v. Oklahoma in 1990 38-7 v. #3 Oklahoma in 1977 27-0 v. #3 Oklahoma in 1973 35-10 v. #7 Oklahoma in 1975 45-21 v. #2 Georgia Tech in 1990 41-17 v. #5 Florida St. in 1989 22-0 v. #1 Miami in 1991 27-7 v. #5 Oklahoma in 1985 23-3 v. #2 Miami in 1988 19-0 v. #17 Arizona St. 20-3 v. #1 Alabama in 1978 27-12 v. #9 Colorado in 1990 36-21 v. #4 Washington in 1991 29-14 v. #2 Washington in 1992 28-14 v. #6 Oklahoma in 1974 41-28 v. #5 UCLA in 1988 27-14 v. #3 Florida St. in 1992 Notes 17 career losses by 11 points or more 11 career losses by 17 points or more 9 career losses by 20 points or more 6 losses by 24 points or more 2 losses by 31 points or more Only one loss of 11 points or more occurred v. an unranked team (Oklahoma.) His 4 worst losses came at the hands of Oklahoma Oklahoma showed up on this list a total of 6 times Wash, FSU, and Miami each showed up twice 5 of these losses came in bowl games The late 80's to early 90's was the worst period An 11 point loss is not a blowout Losing to the #1 or #1 - 2-3 ranked team at the time isnt awful There are some real blue Blood top teams on that list, Bama, Washington at the time, OU, FSU, Miami Getting blown out by Wisconsin or even by your definition Iowa or Minnesota is awful NU played in better bowl game- better opponents than Pelini/Callahan No comparison at all- teams-coaches were night and day apart NU was a feared National Power more often than not mentioned in the hunt for the National Title at some point in the season- 12 of 25 Under Pelini/Callahan- the National Title talk would have been zero 2 losses by 31 points or more in 307 games- take that all day long Osbone lost by 31- ,065% of the time Bo lost by 31+ 5.3% of the time- almost 10X as much as TO TO lost 17 games of 307 by 11 or more- 5.5 % of the time Bo lost 15 games of 94 by 11 or more - almost same number of losses in 213 fewer games- 16% of the time- almost 3X as much as TO No comparison

When I travel- Im looking for something different Something I wont see at home- unique and of course good local food- not Applebees, Wings etc So for my specific needs, going to another crowded sports bar, dive bar, whatever- isnt of any interest Im guessing a genuine NU experience with the band/cheerleaders and all the NU nostalgia, NU crowd participation isnt something the visitor can get at home OTOH if his goal is different- to see how drunk he can get- how many beers can he drink contest type stuff to brag about how drunk they got or how hungover they got- that some young kids are into- then Mistys probably is a waste of his time- and the drive wouldnt be the way to go. We all have different interests

Osborne teams were flat out road killed on a fairly regular basis by Oklahoma and our ranked opponent in the bowl game. In one OU game, the Nebraska offense never crossed the 50 yard line. In other big games we were held to under 200 yards total offense, our bread and butter running game sniffed out and shut down, and the in-game adjustments -- more passing and a few trick plays -- were panicky failures. Defense got gashed pretty well too, if not quite at the Wisconsin levels. I honestly wish I didn't remember this. But I do. And a painful visit to the statistical record confirms it. NU in TOs day and of late- no comparison TOs had MANY close calls against OU before he started dominating them regularly TOs teams blew out inferior teams A 25 year history is MANY more games than a 4 or 7 year gig, LOTS more opps to stumble, but the % was much less AND in that span LOTS of wins over top 10 teams- Bo/Cally- not so much or not at all Few last minute or last play heroics needed to beat inferior teams His teams werent getting taken into the 4th quarter or last play by DIAA teams or bottom of the barrel- obviously weaker teams Against evenly matched teams- TOs teams usually won- rarely if ever got blown out by them That wasnt the case with the last 2 head coaches

Hello It depends on what you like For me- it would be the #1 thing on the list, nothing close in 2nd place Almost all in restaurant NU fans in red. Families, kids, old men, middle aged people, some young singles all out for a good time. Doesn't matter your age- unless youre a young 20 something single maybe- with a goal of getting drunk- chasing women- Mistys not a good choice if that's your thing. No drunks and rowdies, just people having fun in a place loaded with NU memorabilia from the 60s, 70s, 80s etc, Something time forgot The NU band comes in and does a couple of sets in a designated area, everyone really gets into it, stands sings etc Ive taken lots of out of town guests to it, and they all raved about it. One of my buddies sons got his pic taken with a bunch of cheerleaders. Go to the Havelock location- the downtown one, doesn't have the atmosphere, not even close On top of it, you will get a great meal. Mistys is a long time legend for a reason, food is always fantastic- Nebraska steaks. You aren't going to get that by going to some bar in Haymarket or Railyard. They don't take reservations on that night, but they have a huge bar and Ive never had a problem getting a table, after getting a couple of drinks and an appetizer in the bar. Service is always great too- lots of older wait staff who have been there forever. No 16 year old kid hostess taking 15 minutes to figure out if there is a table open and having you wander around the restaurant stuff. Good experience.

The coaches of the league decided he was the best quarterback in the conference in 2012. If that isn't a QB, then what is? I suppose Tommy Frazier, Scott Frost, Eric Crouch and others weren't quarterbacks either. Frazier, Frost and Crouch's teams won Championships and didnt have the chronic turnover problems & bad losses that haunted TM, even though he wasnt even running the Triple Option Being a great QB goes beyond who has the biggest arms, fastest feet, who had the biggest heart or who made the occasional freakish play JMO

. I agree Tommy has Brett favre syndrome Tommy may be the luckiest qb in america I can't think of another qb who has seen more dB's drop sure interceptions and pic 6s

. I agree Tommy has Brett favre syndrome Tommy may be the luckiest qb in america I can't think of another qb who has seen more dB's drop sure interceptions and pic 6s

. I agree Tommy has Brett favre syndrome Tommy may be the luckiest qb in america I can't think of another qb who has seen more dB's drop sure interceptions and pic 6s

Not bad,I agree with most of itBut when you are calling plays there are several ways you can go You can make adjustment tags to what you are running to make the base work You can attack the defense away from where they have chosen to optimize to stop you You have to know all your if thens Then that isn't perfect either your playbook gets narrowed by personnel and game circumstances kids having an off day ,weather field position , how well the d is playing,etc Double slants may be the best play to call against cover 2, but can your qb stay in the pocket and throw it and is your slot good enough to get off the los? Most coaches will tell you 90%+ of games are won in the weeks leading up to the game Not playcalling I will add our play action game should have been good Compared to where it should have been with our run threats It was awful

Anyone with a pulse know beck will not be calling plays at OSU and I never insinuated he was the only guy on offense there or calling playsUrban is paying beck half a million a year to help architect and add wrinkles to the offense becks signature will be all over the OSU offense

I never said Beck would be calling the plays- everyone knows that You dont have to be a playcaller to have your influence felt on an offense Beck is an innovator and Urban even raved about it in one of the games he was commentating on Beck did well at KU with little and a good Head Coach, let's see how he does under a different HC and with some depth Urban loves little tweaks- the inventor of the Utah Shovel Triple Option and bringing the Single Wing back to College football wth Tebow, he will get along well with Beck Guaranteed- you will see Beck in the OSU offense Guaranteed- you see the zone give/keep/pass option as a big piece of the OSU offense now- something Beck believes in. he either wasnt allowed to run it at NU or he didnt have the talent for it, neither will be an issue at OSU Expect to see similar plays off the Sweep and Power Read plays, take that to the bank Urban is a great coach, he doesnt hire guys to stand around- hold a clip board and get paid $525K- half a milllion $$ per year. He brings them on to help his teams win by filling a role. Becks expertise is xs and os- so expect to see that value used by OSU as they craft their offense. I totally agree Becks teams lacked consistent execution, which lands on him, his position coaches and eventually the HC. As to zone blocking almost everyone in College Football bases out of Zone, everyone is recruiting about the same players to do the same things. Zone isnt some one off thing that teams are experimenting with- everyone runs it, almost everyones run games are based on it. NUs run game this year will too, just like it did under Pelini and Callahan As to why NU kept the zone read when our QBs did such a poor job on the read part- the potential for big plays, especially with TM at QB. AND quite often teams were swarming AA- even though the play was only being read properly half the time. Look at how TM got to his big numbers his run yards would look like this: 1, -2, 8, 1, 2, -1, 60. so you see 7 carries for 69 yards and a 10 yard per carry average and think, wow we have a great run game with TM all based on big plays, little consistency. That didnt count in the times he gave wrong to a RB for a 1, 2 or -1 yard gain either. It still made sense to be part of the offense. Even though as time went by we saw less and less of it.

I went to two Spring Coaches Clinics and sat in on Tim BEcks sessions He clearly stated he ran the zone read several different ways There were at least 50 High School coaches in each session- Dont expect any sports reporter other than Damon Benning to ever get/understand/see/ report it, most of them are clueless He ran it reading BSDE and had a play where they read the BSDT AND he optimized it as well- So read it somethimes, called optimized others, like almost every team in DI football Depended on the opponent, D personell and QB Tim spoke at another HS coaches clinic in Orlando at the Capital One Bowl 2011- said exact same thing again. Again no big deal- his words were to the effect " and of course it goes without saying sometimes we just run it as a called play and block it accordingly" as he quicly scratched out a couple of lines over his already crowded white board If you watch NU film- when you see a pulling lineman or an H back/wing/slot in tight blocking the playside LB- that is an optimized play- getting another body at the POA As to TA not being a good option QB What I do know is neither TM OR TA did a great job on the ZOne read or the Sweep and Power Reads ( which are three very different plays, not one, despite what the announcers say)- something that used to be a huge part of our offense and completely disappeared0 the sweep and power read that is. Im talking about the read portion now- not just running the ball. I spoke to a guy who sat in on Joe Ganz analyzing TMs reads- said JG said TM got about half of them right just a coiple of hours after they got done watching it I think we no longer ran it (2013/2014) sweep read/pwer read thanks to our QBs not being great readers and a lack of quality depth at QB- fear of injury There was a lot at practice that I saw a lot of plays that were repped a ton- that we never saw in games Expect OSU to run the triple this year- zone run by RB- read keep by QB- bubble or seam pass While I was never a huge fan of Becks playcalling- he is a good coach- xs and os guy Watch his teams put up some crazy numbers at OSU now that he has quality depth AND a head coach who is an offensive innovator I think Bo put a big lid on Beck that wasnt healthy

Here's my question - what really is the difference between the way those teams practiced and how college teams practice now? We have guys going down to injury all the time these days. If the Huskers in those days practice as they claim... the physicality and ferociousness... how did their bodies survive? Was it steroids? Rampant pain medication use? Was it better training through the pop warner and high school days? Was it the style of play? Was it the benefits of having a far more loaded roster? A combination of some, all, or none of these things? I believe steroids were a big part of the success back in the glory days. Pain meds too probably. Not true IMO I played with several guys who played and started for NU They all made gains, but nothing out of the ordinary with great diet and worlds best college S/c coach Genetically some guys pack it on quickly and others doing same routines and diet wont get same results- nothing to do with steroids One kid was a juicer NU wouldnt let him walk on until he lost a bunch of weight and passed a bunch of tests. He eventually walked on, earned a scholly and started I know he wasnt juicing while he was at NU- he played in an era where NU dominated he got tested all the time

The study I cited was the only one I found and was from a great source, I linked to the study and they laid out their methodology in great detail 2009-2013 Rivals rating vs Massey combined rankings Oregon State had just a +5 which put them in the grouping with NU- as performing to recruiting