WVhuskerXX Posted November 26, 2008 Share Posted November 26, 2008 we just moved to number 35 on the team rankings...passing Duke Quote Link to comment
HuskerMack Posted November 26, 2008 Share Posted November 26, 2008 we just moved to number 35 on the team rankings...passing Duke was just looking at that I really think that if Giles or Burkhead come we will be in the in the 25th or 28th range by the end of the season. If you dont count last year since it wasnt a full season of recruiting that is pretty good for a first year head coach. Quote Link to comment
BIGREDFAN_in_OMAHA Posted November 26, 2008 Share Posted November 26, 2008 Honestly recruiting is so overrated now a days. Joe ganz was a 2 star walk on, and look what he has done. Harrison beck was a 4 star stud and look what he has done. Stars who have underachieved at Nebraska or left (recently) Leon Washington Chris Brooks Rodney Picou David Horne Courtney Grixby Justin Tomerlin ANDRE JONES WAS A 5 STAR.... Marlon Lucky, good, but Roy helu is proven to be more productive. A better back and he is a 3 star. Brandon Jackson, was a 3 star and he was pretty darn good. Zac Taylor, big 12 offensive MVP. Jay Moore, Cariker Recruiting is hype is overrated. It all matters on a players desire and work ethic in college. Getting used to the game, and understanding how to play it based on ones skill set. GO BIG RED not to start this all again but, Grixby was a great corner and without him NU's d would have been a lot worse Very true plus Chris Brooks has a year left, who knows what could happen by next fall But glad to have commit #1 for next year!! Agreed that Brooks still has a year to redeem himself. Leon Washington? Of the Jets? Must have meant Leon Jackson. Quote Link to comment
huskerification of your brain Posted November 26, 2008 Share Posted November 26, 2008 Sort of a moot point on the duke recruiting. if i were given a chance between UNL and Duke I would take duke in a heart beat. No comparison for the undergraduate education between the two. Same can be said for stanford / the ivies. You're kidding right?! If I was a football player, NU of course. Basketball player, Duke of course. I agree with JonahLomu. What elite football player is going to choose Duke over Nebraska? If academics are a strong priority, then I could see it. What about that DT from Maryland that just commited to Stanford over NU? Maryland has had a pretty strong year...... can't say it really compares to Duke football and, their one annual preseason top 25 sympathy vote from Spurrier (I think). Quote Link to comment
Danimal Posted November 28, 2008 Share Posted November 28, 2008 If we can close on a couple more 4*'s before all is said and done we'll move up a ways. We weren't likely to have a highly ranked class coming into this year. We'll be more dependent on scouting/appraisal, lesser-known sleepers like Bodtmann, Zimmerer, and Evans(if he qualifies) will have to perform. Quote Link to comment
Army Husker Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 Now at #35 at Rivals... Rivals Linky... Quote Link to comment
stargazer Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 Hi, new guy here. I was just wondering... where did Nebraska typically fall in terms of recruiting ranking... back in the Osborne years? Has anyone ever tracked just how well the Rivals 100 (for example) have performed in the years following their recruitment? I'm curious just how much these rankings are really worth... outside of bragging rights. Thanks! Quote Link to comment
hosker Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 Now at #35 at Rivals... Rivals Linky... the rankings haven't been updated since Young committed, but i still don't get this..... we have(referring to the non-updated list) 17 commits at an average star ranking of 3.06, and we're ranked 35. mizzou has 16 commits at an average star ranking of 3.00, and they're ranked 28. my question for you folks who pay for that stuff, is rivals being biased or do they have a legit rankings system? Quote Link to comment
melscott62 Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 Now at #35 at Rivals... Rivals Linky... the rankings haven't been updated since Young committed, but i still don't get this..... we have(referring to the non-updated list) 17 commits at an average star ranking of 3.06, and we're ranked 35. mizzou has 16 commits at an average star ranking of 3.00, and they're ranked 28. my question for you folks who pay for that stuff, is rivals being biased or do they have a legit rankings system? I would look at players RR instead of the stars... its more precise. getting a star grade is sort of like a grade in school. a 80 and an 89 were both B's at my high school but the 89 is clearly better. Quote Link to comment
hosker Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 looking further down(or up) the list...... NU 17 commits, 3.06, rank 35 Ga.Tech 17 commits, 2.88, ranked 34 Minn. 15 commits, 2.80, ranked 33 West Va. 17 commits, 3.00, ranked 31 Mizzou 16 commits, 3.00, ranked 28 there's a few other schools with lower star averages, but more commits so i'll leave em alone. Quote Link to comment
Army Husker Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 This is how they come to their rankings, and how a team can be above/below another team with seemingly similar players. Teams are awarded points through a formula that rewards them for both the quantity of commitments and the quality of those players. Prospects with higher star ratings earn more points for the school to which they commit; prospects that are ranked among the top at their positions earn still more points; and prospects that are ranked on the Rivals 100 earn even more bonus points. EDIT: As of today, we moved up to #33...for what it's worth. Quote Link to comment
caveman99 Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 This is how they come to their rankings, and how a team can be above/below another team with seemingly similar players. Teams are awarded points through a formula that rewards them for both the quantity of commitments and the quality of those players. Prospects with higher star ratings earn more points for the school to which they commit; prospects that are ranked among the top at their positions earn still more points; and prospects that are ranked on the Rivals 100 earn even more bonus points. EDIT: As of today, we moved up to #33...for what it's worth. 25th on Scout today, also for what it's worth...... Quote Link to comment
Spooky Tooth Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 This is how they come to their rankings, and how a team can be above/below another team with seemingly similar players. Teams are awarded points through a formula that rewards them for both the quantity of commitments and the quality of those players. Prospects with higher star ratings earn more points for the school to which they commit; prospects that are ranked among the top at their positions earn still more points; and prospects that are ranked on the Rivals 100 earn even more bonus points. EDIT: As of today, we moved up to #33...for what it's worth. 25th on Scout today, also for what it's worth...... Also, FWIW, Scout tends to be more accurate in retrospective analyses of its class, NU and all others. Quote Link to comment
redout22 Posted December 16, 2008 Share Posted December 16, 2008 Nebraska might crack the top 25 or come close on rivals with Burkhead comitting Quote Link to comment
tattooedhusker Posted December 16, 2008 Share Posted December 16, 2008 #19 according to scout Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.