Billyball Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 Now who knows how this class will do in the next two or three years, but I don't like the fact that we've lost a lot of 4 star high school kids and replaced them with 4* jucos. That's not a good trade normally. Elite teams seldom hit the Juco ranks. Another sore spot is that of offensive recruits most our OL. We are so hurting for playmakers any idiot can see the defecit, yet we get OLs. Our top defensive line recruit was in the top 250 and now has dropped out of it. Must have had a bad season, injured or been overated. This is not going as well as I would like. Quote Link to comment
macroboy Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 I'd love to see a class full of 4 and 5 * recruits but that isn't gonna happen. I'm not upset by Gabbert leaving at all. The receiver is a disappointment though. I don't have the problem w/ JUCO's. I think they will make an immediate impact and rumor has it they come with a coach. I bet JUCO's are hit and miss on a % even with high school kids. In my mind OL is our biggest place of need by far. Doesn't matter what play makers you have when the blocking sucks. Oh, and recruiting isn't done yet. I think we pull a couple more 4*'s in before it is done. Quote Link to comment
sewardite4NU Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 We have playmakers on offense. Our backs are good. Our receivers are pretty fast. Brandon Kinnie has been playing well the last couple games so I think he'll be good. We have playmakers. Sucks Carter left, but losing Gabbert isn't a big concern to me. Our OL is KILLING us now. With a better O-Line, I'm convinced we would have beaten Texas. We couldn't get any running game going. Turn those 2-3 yard gains into 6-7 yard gains and that game ends differently. That opens playaction passing. The drop back passing doesn't work at all with no line. Regardless of who is in at QB, they feel rushed and tend to make bad decisions. I'm good with recruiting linemen, at least this year anyways. Ramble ramble ramble... Quote Link to comment
TheCheshireCat Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 The only real loss we've sustained all year is Curtis Carter. Sloan wasn't that good apparently, nor was Gabbert, and Keeston Terry looks like a young boy who wouldn't be able to stand the rigors of training. And as for the JuCo ranks, we took Hardrick (sp?) from LSU and Lavonte David is from Miami. I'll take a south Florida player and a guy recruited for an elite school like LSU over two baby-faced weaklings from Missouri any day. Like I said, the only loss that gets to me is Carter because of his speed. The other 3 aren't that big of deal, and both Hardrick and David are good players. Quote Link to comment
teachercd Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 Now who knows how this class will do in the next two or three years, but I don't like the fact that we've lost a lot of 4 star high school kids and replaced them with 4* jucos. That's not a good trade normally. Elite teams seldom hit the Juco ranks. Another sore spot is that of offensive recruits most our OL. We are so hurting for playmakers any idiot can see the defecit, yet we get OLs. Our top defensive line recruit was in the top 250 and now has dropped out of it. Must have had a bad season, injured or been overated. This is not going as well as I would like. What other boards do you post on? Quote Link to comment
epocSoN Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 No more star gazing. Rivals rankings means nothing. We are attaining quality athletes that can be molded into great athletes. Time and time again we have proof that the stars don't matter. Sam Bradford was a 3 star, Lucky was a 5 star... I could go on and on. Quote Link to comment
epocSoN Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 By the way, our offensive line is THE WORST FACET of our football team. I have said this before, we have 4 of the best Offensive Linemen between this and next years recruiting classes, so we are fixing the glaring issues in our offense. Quote Link to comment
teachercd Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 I think that people need to remember that there are more kids playing high school football now that have S and C coaches at their schools, specilized training, great weight rooms, nutrition programs, great coaches and attend camps. There are sooooo many good high school players, there are so many players that are so close in talent, I think people get hung up on a star or a ranking. Quote Link to comment
Nexus Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 No more star gazing. Rivals rankings means nothing. We are attaining quality athletes that can be molded into great athletes. Time and time again we have proof that the stars don't matter. Sam Bradford was a 3 star, Lucky was a 5 star... I could go on and on. Yeah I have a hard time buying into the star chart myself. In my opinion it's more about attitude and buying into the coaches philosophy. There are so many intangibles that go into making a good player. Some are busts while others aren't. Just depends on the attitude the player chooses to bring with them. Quote Link to comment
husker B-rent Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 No more star gazing. Rivals rankings means nothing. We are attaining quality athletes that can be molded into great athletes. Time and time again we have proof that the stars don't matter. Sam Bradford was a 3 star, Lucky was a 5 star... I could go on and on. WRONG. ugh i get angry when people babble about this and they are heavily misinformed. It has been proven through the NFL draft that highly rated players (ie. 5 stars) have a much better chance of being a first round NFL draft pick. Yes you are going to see your 2 and 3 star players in the 1st round but that is because there are about 800 3 star players and about 25 5 star players. Mathematically about 80% of 5 star players are drafted in the top 3 rounds and about 10% of the five star players never actually play college football as well as about 10% that are busts. Compare that to the 2% of 3 star players that are even drafted... stars do matter. Quote Link to comment
teachercd Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 No more star gazing. Rivals rankings means nothing. We are attaining quality athletes that can be molded into great athletes. Time and time again we have proof that the stars don't matter. Sam Bradford was a 3 star, Lucky was a 5 star... I could go on and on. WRONG. ugh i get angry when people babble about this and they are heavily misinformed. It has been proven through the NFL draft that highly rated players (ie. 5 stars) have a much better chance of being a first round NFL draft pick. Yes you are going to see your 2 and 3 star players in the 1st round but that is because there are about 800 3 star players and about 25 5 star players. Mathematically about 80% of 5 star players are drafted in the top 3 rounds and about 10% of the five star players never actually play college football as well as about 10% that are busts. Compare that to the 2% of 3 star players that are even drafted... stars do matter. See, you are confusing NFL talent with College Talent. That is the star gazers problem. Tebow, one of the greatest players ever, where is he getting drafted? What about McCoy? Who is the best RB in the pros right now, Chris Johnson, how many stars did he have? Who is the best defensive players, jarred Allen, was he ranked at all? There are sooo many good high school players NOW, it is like comparing to Victorias Secret Models, guess what, one might be hotter but they are both hot. sh#t, the best linebacker on that USC team two years ago was a freaking walk on! People try to use stats as an indicator, thats fine, guess what, Bama or UT will win the championship year, there might be a total of 2 players taken from both those teams combined in the first round and that could be pushing it. Quote Link to comment
rickjames Posted December 14, 2009 Share Posted December 14, 2009 nothing wrong with signing juco players as long as they're impact players...just don't want to sign too many year in year out...some of the best players come from the juco.. Quote Link to comment
HUSKER FREAK Posted December 14, 2009 Share Posted December 14, 2009 I am fine with the Jucos that committed this year. There is a need at both of the spots imediately, because of the holes that were left by the old staff. These two should be able to make an impact right away. Quote Link to comment
melscott62 Posted December 14, 2009 Share Posted December 14, 2009 nothing wrong with signing juco players as long as they're impact players...just don't want to sign too many year in year out...some of the best players come from the juco.. a lof of big name schools are getting JUCOS http://rivals100.rivals.com/viewrank.asp?S...amp;ra_key=2511 on the list there USC, LSU, Bama, Tenn, ole Miss, UCLA, Auburn, Oregon, Florida state........ Quote Link to comment
dylan Posted December 14, 2009 Share Posted December 14, 2009 Elite teams seldom hit the Juco ranks. oklahoma and most of the SEC (to include FLA and LSU) disagree with you. pretty sure USC will even take the occasional juco. it's about identifying the ones that can help you. we don't want to take more than a few per class, but taking the right few can provide a huge boost to our recruiting. i really like the ones we got last year (gomes and kinnie) and the three for this year look pretty darn good, too. as to the rest of your post, you recruit for 2-4 years down the road and we happen to have a need for OL on our roster. we're obviously looking at play making positions as well (harper, enunwa, probably hill and maybe a back as well), but we've got a lot of young receivers and backs on scholarship already. a better offense next year will need to come from getting the guys we already have healthy and coached up better, starting with the OL. 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.