Recruiting an how it translates to the field

[westgatehusker]

it seems like im hearing that we'll never be able to compete with teams like Texas and Oklahoma because we don't have an anual top 5 class.

 

well anyways here are the top 25 as far as recruiting goes from 03 and the top 25 BCS rankings of 06 .By this time in most players careers if they are going to have signifecant playing time they will have

 

 

1 LSU

2 Florida

3 Southern Cal

4 Oklahoma

5 Miami-FL

6 Georgia

7 NC State

8 South Carolina

9 Mississippi State

10 Texas A&M

11 Auburn

12 Notre Dame

13 North Carolina

14 California

15 Oklahoma State

16 Texas

17 Michigan

18 Tennessee

19 Colorado

20 Virginia

21 Florida State

22 Arizona State

23 Washington

24 Boston College

25 Stanford

 

 

and the actual rankings

 

 

1. Florida (64) 13-1 1,624

2. Ohio State 12-1 1,492

3. LSU 11-2 1,452

4. USC 11-2 1,389

5. Boise State (1) 13-0 1,383

6. Louisville 12-1 1,338

7. Wisconsin 12-1 1,288

8. Michigan 11-2 1,145

9. Auburn 11-2 1,112

10. West Virginia 11-2 1,035

11. Oklahoma 11-3 933

12. Rutgers 11-2 884

13. Texas 10-3 772

14. California 10-3 697

15. Arkansas 10-4 677

16. Brigham Young 11-2 673

17. Notre Dame 10-3 553

18. Wake Forest 11-3 551

19. Virginia Tech 10-3 407

20. Boston College 10-3 353

21. Oregon State 10-4 291

22. TCU 11-2 279

23. Georgia 9-4 204

24. Penn State 9-4 183

25. Tennessee 9-4 181

 

 

it's not hard to spot a few who did better than their recruiting rankings would suggest

 

my point is recruiting doesn't mean a whole lot more than much as coaching and developing players

alot of the time recruits just doesn't translate to the field

 

 

 

 

 

we may never recruit like mack brown but at least he's a moron

[skersfan]

Exceptions occur.

 

But of the last 7 National Champions, where were/are they ranked in recruiting?

 

It makes a big difference, time in and time out having a top 5 class.

 

Talent laden programs have their own problems. We saw it after our stellar year. Defections, changes in position. But overall if you are not strong on recruting you are not going to win the NC. Not a single one has in the last 7 years that I can think of. Times are changing and BC is aware of it. The athletic director that we all seem to hate is very much aware of. He was the recruiting coord when we were winning big time.

 

I noticed that Texas does not appear in the final list until way down. That is another problem with having top recruiting classes and filling the class. A couple of years ago Texas was only able to take like 10 kids I think. Even though they may have been highly rated it turns out to be a numbers game. We score high sometimes because of the small classes that the previous staff took.

 

Sales boys, every business runs on sales, college football is no different.

 

Also the class of 2003 did not see the field until 2004 if they did not redshirt. Top programs play freshman if they are ready to play, but a lot are redshirted. Most of the 2003 class will really start to develop this year. Recruiting is an investment in the future not instantly. Some exceptions there to, but overall it is down the road. BC is stocking our shelves, it just takes time.

[DaveH]

You need to recruit well, period. Anyone disputing that is fooling themselves.

 

However, more important than ranking high by the services that be is getting the players that you want and need.

[westgatehusker]

I agree with both of you recruiting is a must and that is one of the reasons solich is coaching in ohio.

 

but developing players and coaching is also key all in all you look at succsesfull teams and some don't recruit with the best of them and are still very succesesfull

[BGREDSTUCKN IA]

And if Vince Young would have stuck around, Texas would be 13 in recruiting class and 1 in the rankings. Development of players is just as important.

[Hunter94]

the best chef in the world can't make steak out of hamburger

[strigori]

While development and recruiting go hand in hand, recruiting goes first. Every team that would be considered an annual power in football, recruits in the top 20 year in and year out. Teams like Boise who get great runs of wins, wouldnt do the same if they were in a major conference, period. LSU, Texas, USC, Tennessee, Florida, Ohio State, Michigan, they are all in the tops of recruiting every year, and almost never out of the top 25.

 

One great class wont do it either, it has to be a consistant thing, every year. If one class would do it, Illinois is going to be huge in 3 years, but I wouldnt count on it.

 

Compare two teams. Texas and Iowa. Texas is always in the top 10 recruiting, they get a top 20 class if they dont even try. Iowa will get some good players every year, but certainly not the number of elites that Texas gets. Ferentz will be called the better coach, and developer of talent than Mack Brown will by nearly anyone. But who ends the year with the higher ranking? Who has won National Championships? Who would you put money down on to win the best 3 of 5 games? Texas.

[skersfan]

It ainit the X's and O's it's the Jimmy's and Joe's. It has never changed. Talent brings consistancy, with consistancy comes NC's.

 

We are not there yet, but we are getting closer. A few major wins by this staff and it could change very quickly. I am hoping BC is the right guy, because he does understand the value and importance of recruiting. He understands the value of the Juco kids too.

 

Steak out of hamburger, classic Hunter, classic.

[husker rob]

you can try an polish a turd all you want but in the end all you have is a shiny piece of sh#t

[Husker_x]

Steaks out of hamburger, exactly.

 

In general terms I don't think you can scientifically assert that recruiting equals winning. The reasons for this are as numerous as the stars. A billion things can affect a season: injuries, fatalities, academic probation, drunk driving, suspensions, wind, rain, turf, morale, schedule, etc, etc, etc. There is obvioiusly a correlation, though.

 

The better players we can get into our system, the better CHANCE we have of reaching the top. After all, the more horses you hitch to your wagon, the faster it goes and the longer it can keep up the pace. Our problem right now, I think, is a lack of depth at too may key positions. For awhile I was really disheartened with Callahan's lack of winning. After all, that is all this game is about in Husker nation––winning. We have to be sportsmanlike about it and do it with class, but without the Ws on the schedule come season's end, we're a pissed off fanbase. However, in seeing the offensive scheme develop this last season, I must confess that I think what Bill's got going excites me almost as much as the wave of braun and muscle in the 90s. We have a unique look in our system, an intense use of motion and precision. Once we have a fully-equipped team at all positions on both sides of the ball, I think we're in for some good times, gentlemen.

 

More to the original point, I agree that recruiting is a key element in success. Development cannot be overlooked. But too many factors can make or break a team throughout any season that no direct line between recruiting and winning can logically be drawn.

 

And USC must be razed to the ground.

[westgatehusker]

While development and recruiting go hand in hand, recruiting goes first. Every team that would be considered an annual power in football, recruits in the top 20 year in and year out. Teams like Boise who get great runs of wins, wouldnt do the same if they were in a major conference, period. LSU, Texas, USC, Tennessee, Florida, Ohio State, Michigan, they are all in the tops of recruiting every year, and almost never out of the top 25.

 

One great class wont do it either, it has to be a consistant thing, every year. If one class would do it, Illinois is going to be huge in 3 years, but I wouldnt count on it.

 

Compare two teams. Texas and Iowa. Texas is always in the top 10 recruiting, they get a top 20 class if they dont even try. Iowa will get some good players every year, but certainly not the number of elites that Texas gets. Ferentz will be called the better coach, and developer of talent than Mack Brown will by nearly anyone. But who ends the year with the higher ranking? Who has won National Championships? Who would you put money down on to win the best 3 of 5 games? Texas.

this is what I'm trying to say that you don't need a top 5 class every year to do well.

Stay in the top 15 to 20 and get an odd top 5 class every once and awhile and with good coaching you'll be succesfull, you won't win a national championship 2 out of every 3 years but you'll be succsesfull

 

 

Nebraska can get to bcs games with how they're recruiting Nebraska can beat Texas and Oklahoma even if they where 5 teams back in the recruiting rankings

 

and I know a team full of 2 stars and unranked players couldn't compete in a major conference but a team that recruits like nebraska can

[skersfan]

I don't know if the average fan at Nebraska is into doing well. Most seem to only remember the mid 90's as Nebraska football.

 

To do what TO did in his final years, will require recruiting like SC, Texas, Florida and few others. I seriously doubt we will be able to do that. The question then becomes can we coach what we get up to the level they need to be. We will not know that for a few years of real good recruiting, more like this years is what we need. We do not have the talent base to do it currently. I think a major win is needed to get us to that level, we are depending on BC to do that this year. A win over SC or Texas at home and the recruiting doors will open, not flood gates but an improvement over what we have seen.

 

I think that is going to happen this year.

[huskered17]

the best chef in the world can't make steak out of hamburger

 

They sure seem to try to, down here in Arizona.

 

GBR!!!

[huskered17]

you can try an polish a turd all you want but in the end all you have is a shiny piece of sh#t

 

 

 

 

GBR!!!

[huskered17]

I don't know if the average fan at Nebraska is into doing well. Most seem to only remember the mid 90's as Nebraska football.

 

To do what TO did in his final years, will require recruiting like SC, Texas, Florida and few others. I seriously doubt we will be able to do that. The question then becomes can we coach what we get up to the level they need to be. We will not know that for a few years of real good recruiting, more like this years is what we need. We do not have the talent base to do it currently. I think a major win is needed to get us to that level, we are depending on BC to do that this year. A win over SC or Texas at home and the recruiting doors will open, not flood gates but an improvement over what we have seen.

 

I think that is going to happen this year.

 

 

Sc, Texas, Fla and Ohio.st. Those places have a huge population base to chose from, makes it a lot easier to stock a team when the kids are beating at the door to get in.

I think your right though, we are getting there. This year may be it.

 

GBR!!!