Number of consensus top 10 classes 1990-97?

[rkhufu7]

USC gets top 5 and most of the time top 3 if not #1 classes. I wanted someone to show me where Nebraska signed CONSENSUS top 10 classes in football recruiting EVERY YEAR like USC because someone posted that Nebraska had the same type of talent USC has today back in the 90s!

[huskers1]

Someone made a point the other day that we went out and got the best talent that fit out scheme. The way our offense was set up under osborne we had a few good RB's a game changer at QB and an OL that was made out of a superior weight training program. Sure we had our share of blue chippers at OL but a lot of them were developed. It's not like we went out and got five stars at every position like USC does bc we didnt really need blue chippers at WR. Our defense in the glory days really reminds me of last years defense; Walk ons filling the holes where we are lacking depth. We got our fair share of players but overall we didnt need blue chips at every position thanks to our system, walk on program and weight training program.

[HuskerJen]

USC gets top 5 and most of the time top 3 if not #1 classes. I wanted someone to show me where Nebraska signed CONSENSUS top 10 classes in football recruiting EVERY YEAR like USC because someone posted that Nebraska had the same type of talent USC has today back in the 90s!

 

Your post is fundamentally flawed to begin with...

 

1. Nebraska has NEVER been a recruiting powerhouse like USC in terms of signing kids with lots of "stars" according to the recruiting services.

 

2. These recruiting services, and their evaluations, are hardly an exact science or a reliable indicator of future performance.

 

3. During the mid 90's run Nebraska did have "usc type talent" especially on defense. The three national titles, a 60-3 combined record, a 38 point victory over #2 Florida and a complete drubbing of a Peyton Manning led Tennessee, which had a host of future NFL players also...speaks for itself.

[rkhufu7]

Someone made a point the other day that we went out and got the best talent that fit out scheme. The way our offense was set up under osborne we had a few good RB's a game changer at QB and an OL that was made out of a superior weight training program. Sure we had our share of blue chippers at OL but a lot of them were developed. It's not like we went out and got five stars at every position like USC does bc we didnt really need blue chippers at WR. Our defense in the glory days really reminds me of last years defense; Walk ons filling the holes where we are lacking depth. We got our fair share of players but overall we didnt need blue chips at every position thanks to our system, walk on program and weight training program.

WORD! My sentiments exactly! Macovicka's were walkon's from 8 man football and I think Schlessinger was also. Why do we have to WASTE ships recruiting FBs when we will be in a 3 wide spread much of the time? I think Frazier was more of a LEADER, than a difference maker like Crouch, whom I think wasn't a great LEADER, but a superior athlete. Frost was a PERFECT NU QB, that just needed time in the system. Crouch had more speed, but Frost and Frazier were more powerful, and Crouch did not benefit from a GREAT I-back like Frost and Frazier. McBride attacks UT in Austin in 99 and that is a MNC and Solich is still at NU! note that NU also emphacised squats and power cleans more than BP. BP is the big emphasis for passing teams. I do think they did 3 rep maxes? The SYSTEM spoke, it seems like Florida is the NEW Big Red with a great defense and option attack from the gun and a strong inside games using zone, trap and counter blocking schemes. I think that NU could run an offense with a power I and a spread combo, like UT 2005. The spread has increased the VALUE of dual threat QBs and opened up the passing game, while still giving defenses the same headaches the option has always caused.

[cb1954]

Someone made a point the other day that we went out and got the best talent that fit out scheme. The way our offense was set up under osborne we had a few good RB's a game changer at QB and an OL that was made out of a superior weight training program. Sure we had our share of blue chippers at OL but a lot of them were developed. It's not like we went out and got five stars at every position like USC does bc we didnt really need blue chippers at WR. Our defense in the glory days really reminds me of last years defense; Walk ons filling the holes where we are lacking depth. We got our fair share of players but overall we didnt need blue chips at every position thanks to our system, walk on program and weight training program.

WORD! My sentiments exactly! Macovicka's were walkon's from 8 man football and I think Schlessinger was also. Why do we have to WASTE ships recruiting FBs when we will be in a 3 wide spread much of the time? I think Frazier was more of a LEADER, than a difference maker like Crouch, whom I think wasn't a great LEADER, but a superior athlete. Frost was a PERFECT NU QB, that just needed time in the system. Crouch had more speed, but Frost and Frazier were more powerful, and Crouch did not benefit from a GREAT I-back like Frost and Frazier. McBride attacks UT in Austin in 99 and that is a MNC and Solich is still at NU! note that NU also emphacised squats and power cleans more than BP. BP is the big emphasis for passing teams. I do think they did 3 rep maxes? The SYSTEM spoke, it seems like Florida is the NEW Big Red with a great defense and option attack from the gun and a strong inside games using zone, trap and counter blocking schemes. I think that NU could run an offense with a power I and a spread combo, like UT 2005. The spread has increased the VALUE of dual threat QBs and opened up the passing game, while still giving defenses the same headaches the option has always caused.

 

IMO, Nebraska needs three things as far as players. (in no particular order)

1. Every recruit in Nebraska that can play major college ball or be developed to play at that level

2. Recruit top players from around the country that will fit into NU's system

3. Walk-ons. Its a win - win situation with walk ons. They have filled the gaps where recruits did not work out, outplayed/and or pushed recruits to be better players. There were some teams under Osborne that close to half the starters came to NU as walk ons.

[Huskers Forever]

Someone made a point the other day that we went out and got the best talent that fit out scheme. The way our offense was set up under osborne we had a few good RB's a game changer at QB and an OL that was made out of a superior weight training program. Sure we had our share of blue chippers at OL but a lot of them were developed. It's not like we went out and got five stars at every position like USC does bc we didnt really need blue chippers at WR. Our defense in the glory days really reminds me of last years defense; Walk ons filling the holes where we are lacking depth. We got our fair share of players but overall we didnt need blue chips at every position thanks to our system, walk on program and weight training program.

WORD! My sentiments exactly! Macovicka's were walkon's from 8 man football and I think Schlessinger was also. Why do we have to WASTE ships recruiting FBs when we will be in a 3 wide spread much of the time? I think Frazier was more of a LEADER, than a difference maker like Crouch, whom I think wasn't a great LEADER, but a superior athlete. Frost was a PERFECT NU QB, that just needed time in the system. Crouch had more speed, but Frost and Frazier were more powerful, and Crouch did not benefit from a GREAT I-back like Frost and Frazier. McBride attacks UT in Austin in 99 and that is a MNC and Solich is still at NU! note that NU also emphacised squats and power cleans more than BP. BP is the big emphasis for passing teams. I do think they did 3 rep maxes? The SYSTEM spoke, it seems like Florida is the NEW Big Red with a great defense and option attack from the gun and a strong inside games using zone, trap and counter blocking schemes. I think that NU could run an offense with a power I and a spread combo, like UT 2005. The spread has increased the VALUE of dual threat QBs and opened up the passing game, while still giving defenses the same headaches the option has always caused.

Dude, are you schizophrenic? Because that post was all over the place.

 

Cliff notes to break it down:

Walk ons at FB

best QB in the 90's

Mcbride attacking UT in 99 and Solich stays

NU weight training back in the day

Florida is the new Big Red

NU could run a power I and a spread combo

 

You're posts give me a headache

[rawhide]

Unless you are a licensed psychiatrist please try not to diagnose anyone over the net. Last warning. Husker Forever if someone posts things you don't like please make use of the ignore option at your convenience.

 

The same goes for rkhufu7 also.

 

 

 

rawhide

[huskerswrkhavoc]

USC gets top 5 and most of the time top 3 if not #1 classes. I wanted someone to show me where Nebraska signed CONSENSUS top 10 classes in football recruiting EVERY YEAR like USC because someone posted that Nebraska had the same type of talent USC has today back in the 90s!

 

Your post is fundamentally flawed to begin with...

 

1. Nebraska has NEVER been a recruiting powerhouse like USC in terms of signing kids with lots of "stars" according to the recruiting services.

 

2. These recruiting services, and their evaluations, are hardly an exact science or a reliable indicator of future performance.

 

3. During the mid 90's run Nebraska did have "usc type talent" especially on defense. The three national titles, a 60-3 combined record, a 38 point victory over #2 Florida and a complete drubbing of a Peyton Manning led Tennessee, which had a host of future NFL players also...speaks for itself.

 

 

Welcome to rkhufu posts....

[HSKRNOKC]

Unless you are a licensed psychiatrist please try not to diagnose anyone over the net. Last warning. Husker Forever if someone posts things you don't like please make use of the ignore option at your convenience.

 

The same goes for rkhufu7 also.

 

 

 

rawhide

Woodshed is an option too.

[Pedro Guerrero]

IMO, Nebraska needs three things as far as players. (in no particular order)

1. Every recruit in Nebraska that can play major college ball or be developed to play at that level

2. Recruit top players from around the country that will fit into NU's system

3. Walk-ons. Its a win - win situation with walk ons. They have filled the gaps where recruits did not work out, outplayed/and or pushed recruits to be better players. There were some teams under Osborne that close to half the starters came to NU as walk ons.

 

Amen! I agree with everything you say right here. It seems like #1 has been lacking the last few though.

[The Maudfather]

Rkhufu, you totally got me...Originally i just kinda skimmed over and assumed you were talking about the # of concensus top 10 finishes for OKLAHOMA STATE, but after further examination it does belong in husker football

 

p.s. Gundy is a douche...and the only confirmed man in college football

[Huskers Forever]

Unless you are a licensed psychiatrist please try not to diagnose anyone over the net. Last warning. Husker Forever if someone posts things you don't like please make use of the ignore option at your convenience.

 

The same goes for rkhufu7 also.

 

 

 

rawhide

Woodshed is an option too.

I would love to take rkhufu7 to the woodshed. PM he and I the password, so we can get in there. Of course, he is the one who called me an idiot.

[robsker]

USC gets top 5 and most of the time top 3 if not #1 classes. I wanted someone to show me where Nebraska signed CONSENSUS top 10 classes in football recruiting EVERY YEAR like USC because someone posted that Nebraska had the same type of talent USC has today back in the 90s!

 

 

OK. I'll play.

 

First, the assumption that talent on a college football team is best measured by the predictions of college football success based upon High School performance --- this is, based upon recruiting rankings, is very flawed. The talent of a college football team is MUCH BETTER measured by players exiting that team and making it in the NFL draft.

 

On this basis, many of the Osborne teams of the 90's were very, very, very talented. Scores of players went to the NFL. Without looking this up and getting actual numbers, I'd guess that NU definitely, absolutely were in the top 10 most every year of the 1990's in terms of players drafted (perhaps not every year, but most years, and even in off years they were in the top 20 anyhow). Many years they were in the top 5 --- again a guess --- someone with more time can validate or invalidate this.

 

The point --- the Husker teams of the 90's had a great deal of talent. Now compared to USC these past 6-7 years (that is NU in the 90's vs. USC in the 2000's) I'd guess that USC in the 2000's had more players drafted per year on average than did the Huskers and yes, I'd say that the talent edge probably goes to USC --- but probably not by as wide a gap as most would guess.

 

HS recruiting evaluations (recruiting rankings) are meaningless compared to exiting players drafted. by this measure, NU was very talented and even in view of that talent NU over-achieved. USC is even more talented in the 2000's than was NU in the 1990's (likely by a closer margin than most think) but they grossly under-achieved.

 

NU had a superior system and better coaching than does USC.

 

For what it is worth, Pete Carrol is the most over-rated coach in the nation --- with the talent he has, he should have won at least one and probably two more MNC's than he has. USC has little excuse not to win essentially every game. Carrol can recruit (and it is easy to do so at USC), but manage the egos and get the guys to play hard, tough, consistent football at or near their peek --- no --- not so good.

 

Osborne and his staff could and did maximise the productivity from what they had. This is why NU in the 1990's was more sucessful than USC has been in the 2000's. Osborne was a superior coach relative to Carrol. Carrol had more talent (again not by the margin one might think) but he could not elicit from that talent the performance needed to dominate. Actually, right now arguably Florida is the team of the 2000's, not USC.

[In the Deed the Glory]

USC gets top 5 and most of the time top 3 if not #1 classes. I wanted someone to show me where Nebraska signed CONSENSUS top 10 classes in football recruiting EVERY YEAR like USC because someone posted that Nebraska had the same type of talent USC has today back in the 90s!

 

 

OK. I'll play.

 

First, the assumption that talent on a college football team is best measured by the predictions of college football success based upon High School performance --- this is, based upon recruiting rankings, is very flawed. The talent of a college football team is MUCH BETTER measured by players exiting that team and making it in the NFL draft.

 

On this basis, many of the Osborne teams of the 90's were very, very, very talented. Scores of players went to the NFL. Without looking this up and getting actual numbers, I'd guess that NU definitely, absolutely were in the top 10 most every year of the 1990's in terms of players drafted (perhaps not every year, but most years, and even in off years they were in the top 20 anyhow). Many years they were in the top 5 --- again a guess --- someone with more time can validate or invalidate this.

 

The point --- the Husker teams of the 90's had a great deal of talent. Now compared to USC these past 6-7 years (that is NU in the 90's vs. USC in the 2000's) I'd guess that USC in the 2000's had more players drafted per year on average than did the Huskers and yes, I'd say that the talent edge probably goes to USC --- but probably not by as wide a gap as most would guess.

 

HS recruiting evaluations (recruiting rankings) are meaningless compared to exiting players drafted. by this measure, NU was very talented and even in view of that talent NU over-achieved. USC is even more talented in the 2000's than was NU in the 1990's (likely by a closer margin than most think) but they grossly under-achieved.

 

NU had a superior system and better coaching than does USC.

 

For what it is worth, Pete Carrol is the most over-rated coach in the nation --- with the talent he has, he should have won at least one and probably two more MNC's than he has. USC has little excuse not to win essentially every game. Carrol can recruit (and it is easy to do so at USC), but manage the egos and get the guys to play hard, tough, consistent football at or near their peek --- no --- not so good.

 

Osborne and his staff could and did maximise the productivity from what they had. This is why NU in the 1990's was more sucessful than USC has been in the 2000's. Osborne was a superior coach relative to Carrol. Carrol had more talent (again not by the margin one might think) but he could not elicit from that talent the performance needed to dominate. Actually, right now arguably Florida is the team of the 2000's, not USC.

 

That is exactly what I have previously stated. Let the NFL be the judge of talent, not websites...

[clone]

Who cares??!!

 

It's 2009!