How long is going to take for us to make a recruiting splash?

[JOEY]

I mean I dont really have any complaints with how we are doing right now with recruting, and I know that our staff recruits well.. but how long do you think it will take for us to consistently start being in the Top 10 every year for recruiting classes? Maybe if we win the Big 12 championship and have a few 11+ win seasons?

[HuskersNow]

Personally, I think a class should be evaluated a few years down the road. Too much stock is given to Rivals ratings. The people who rank football players for rivals are in this business to sell subscriptions. Thus it benefits them to rate a recruit highly who will not decide until national signing day where he will attend school as opposed to rating a kid highly who decides before his senior season in high school where he will attend.

 

Also, coaching does say a lot about how good a football player will become. For example, the Nebraska coaching staff likes to recruit defensive backs who have good speed and potential rather than just focusing on how awesome their highlight reels are. They believe that they can take these people and turn them into stars, regardless of their Rivals rating.

 

So, is getting ranked in the top 10 in recruiting by Rivals important? I really don't think so. Winning is all that matters. You mentioned that some 11+ win seasons could improve our recruiting as Rivals sees it, but, I would be happy with 11+ win seasons by themselves regardless of how our recruiting is going according to so called experts. It almost seems as if you see winning as a means to get better Rivals recruiting classes instead of a means to get into the national championship game.

[AndyDufresne]

Personally, I think a class should be evaluated a few years down the road. Too much stock is given to Rivals ratings. The people who rank football players for rivals are in this business to sell subscriptions. Thus it benefits them to rate a recruit highly who will not decide until national signing day where he will attend school as opposed to rating a kid highly who decides before his senior season in high school where he will attend.

 

Also, coaching does say a lot about how good a football player will become. For example, the Nebraska coaching staff likes to recruit defensive backs who have good speed and potential rather than just focusing on how awesome their highlight reels are. They believe that they can take these people and turn them into stars, regardless of their Rivals rating.

 

So, is getting ranked in the top 10 in recruiting by Rivals important? I really don't think so. Winning is all that matters. You mentioned that some 11+ win seasons could improve our recruiting as Rivals sees it, but, I would be happy with 11+ win seasons by themselves regardless of how our recruiting is going according to so called experts. It almost seems as if you see winning as a means to get better Rivals recruiting classes instead of a means to get into the national championship game.

 

Exactly. If we're stringing together 11+ win seasons with the recruits that we already have, then I think that we have been making a recruiting splash regardless of where our classes have been ranked. No one at Nebraska has consistently brought in top 10 classes. Not Bill Callahan and not Tom Osborne. If TO's history holds true today, classes consistently ranked in the top 20 along with strong walk-on classes have a good chance to get us close to where we want to be. I say close because I just don't think in today's environment a run like we had in the mid-90's is a very realistic goal.

[JOEY]

yeah but we arent winning 11 games a season... yet.. I guess I just want people to really start liking nebraska more. I guess if we start winning more games then those big name targets will be more attracted to the nebraska scholorship offer.. It just sucks that we have a big disadvantage with our location. Most of the big name targets from california texas and florida dont wanna go to nebraska because of the weather. Kids these days just dont know the tradition of what its like to be a husker and it seems like they just dont care.

[shyndy]

A. who needs big name targets?

 

B. I thought we already had some big name targets in this year's class?

 

C. I agree that the kids don't seem to care much about the tradition, although the new administration and coaches seem to be re-instilling that in the student athletes that are here.

[ronsss]

as far as i know...osborn hardly ever had a top 10 recruiting team and had done very well...look at notre dame , allmost everyyear in the top 10,,,,but not too good.

[Redmusky]

as far as i know...osborn hardly ever had a top 10 recruiting team and had done very well...look at notre dame , allmost everyyear in the top 10,,,,but not too good.

 

The secret is to recruit players who are both mentally and physically capable of playing your system. If your school is located outside of a recuiting hot beds this becomes more important

[schuhbdoo]

yeah but we arent winning 11 games a season... yet.. I guess I just want people to really start liking nebraska more. I guess if we start winning more games then those big name targets will be more attracted to the nebraska scholorship offer.. It just sucks that we have a big disadvantage with our location. Most of the big name targets from california texas and florida dont wanna go to nebraska because of the weather. Kids these days just dont know the tradition of what its like to be a husker and it seems like they just dont care.

With slightly better offensive production this team wins 13 games last year. Please keep in mind Bo took over a team in the top 120 not top 10. After 2 short years he has this team firmly planted in the top 10 in most pre-season polls. This is without a true quality QB that is our no. 1. I don't think Bo's first two recruiting classes were in the top 20, they were closer to the top 30. Being able to change the whole culture of the program with most of the same talent that Callahan had, it truly amazing.

 

NU has some disadvantages when it comes to recruiting, most of us know what those are.

 

Winning more, winning the big games as well as winning the close games will get recruits to like us more. We didn't win the close games last (VT,ISU,UT) year or the big game.(UT)

 

Last year got a lot of us believing we are back, but we still have work to do.

 

Most fans from other schools think this team will struggle because one player moved on to the NFL. Well a lot of teams lost great players to the NFL and they still are ranked high going into this season.

 

We are fortunate to have Bo running the program and just be patient and if he stays longterm, he will have top 10 recruiting classes consistently.

[EZ-E]

The myth of Osborne not having top classes is just that, a myth. His classes were never top 1 or 2. But he consistantly finished anywhere from 8-25. I think 3rd might have been the best he did. Dont quote me on that. IIRC that was what it was.

[dylan]

The myth of Osborne not having top classes is just that, a myth. His classes were never top 1 or 2. But he consistantly finished anywhere from 8-25. I think 3rd might have been the best he did. Dont quote me on that. IIRC that was what it was.

 

i'm pretty sure at least one, and probably a couple, were considered at the time to be the top class in the nation.

[AndyDufresne]

The myth of Osborne not having top classes is just that, a myth. His classes were never top 1 or 2. But he consistantly finished anywhere from 8-25. I think 3rd might have been the best he did. Dont quote me on that. IIRC that was what it was.

 

i'm pretty sure at least one, and probably a couple, were considered at the time to be the top class in the nation.

 

I don't know about the 80's, but our recruiting rankings from 1990-1997 were 10th, 28th, 14th, 18th, 20th, 8th, 6th, and 19th according to SuperPrep. The majority of players from the domininant '95 team were from classes ranked 28th, 14th, 18th, and 20th. Now that was a different world in terms of recruiting coverage than it is today, so it's probably not like comparing apples to apples.

 

This brings me to EZ-E's post about Osborne's top recruiting classes being a myth. 8-25 is quite the range, and there is a significant on paper difference between the high and low. If 20-25 is a top recruiting class, I think Bo will meet or exceed this in most years. If the mark is 1-15, TO was batting .500 for the time period that I posted. It remains to be seen if Bo can match this in the long term.

[EZ-E]

The myth of Osborne not having top classes is just that, a myth. His classes were never top 1 or 2. But he consistantly finished anywhere from 8-25. I think 3rd might have been the best he did. Dont quote me on that. IIRC that was what it was.

 

i'm pretty sure at least one, and probably a couple, were considered at the time to be the top class in the nation.

 

I don't know about the 80's, but our recruiting rankings from 1990-1997 were 10th, 28th, 14th, 18th, 20th, 8th, 6th, and 19th according to SuperPrep. The majority of players from the domininant '95 team were from classes ranked 28th, 14th, 18th, and 20th. Now that was a different world in terms of recruiting coverage than it is today, so it's probably not like comparing apples to apples.

 

This brings me to EZ-E's post about Osborne's top recruiting classes being a myth. 8-25 is quite the range, and there is a significant on paper difference between the high and low. If 20-25 is a top recruiting class, I think Bo will meet or exceed this in most years. If the mark is 1-15, TO was batting .500 for the time period that I posted. It remains to be seen if Bo can match this in the long term.

 

But you see what I mean? The thing about Osborne's classes not being very good is untrue. We had a top 25 class in 2010 and I consider that class to be a very good one.

[raidersfan13]

I mean I dont really have any complaints with how we are doing right now with recruting, and I know that our staff recruits well.. but how long do you think it will take for us to consistently start being in the Top 10 every year for recruiting classes? Maybe if we win the Big 12 championship and have a few 11+ win seasons?

patience is key young padowan

[AndyDufresne]

The myth of Osborne not having top classes is just that, a myth. His classes were never top 1 or 2. But he consistantly finished anywhere from 8-25. I think 3rd might have been the best he did. Dont quote me on that. IIRC that was what it was.

 

i'm pretty sure at least one, and probably a couple, were considered at the time to be the top class in the nation.

 

I don't know about the 80's, but our recruiting rankings from 1990-1997 were 10th, 28th, 14th, 18th, 20th, 8th, 6th, and 19th according to SuperPrep. The majority of players from the domininant '95 team were from classes ranked 28th, 14th, 18th, and 20th. Now that was a different world in terms of recruiting coverage than it is today, so it's probably not like comparing apples to apples.

 

This brings me to EZ-E's post about Osborne's top recruiting classes being a myth. 8-25 is quite the range, and there is a significant on paper difference between the high and low. If 20-25 is a top recruiting class, I think Bo will meet or exceed this in most years. If the mark is 1-15, TO was batting .500 for the time period that I posted. It remains to be seen if Bo can match this in the long term.

 

But you see what I mean? The thing about Osborne's classes not being very good is untrue. We had a top 25 class in 2010 and I consider that class to be a very good one.

 

I was unaware that there were those who thought Osborne was winning national championships with low ranked classes and a bunch of walk-ons. Is this a prevalent thought?

[dylan]

The myth of Osborne not having top classes is just that, a myth. His classes were never top 1 or 2. But he consistantly finished anywhere from 8-25. I think 3rd might have been the best he did. Dont quote me on that. IIRC that was what it was.

 

i'm pretty sure at least one, and probably a couple, were considered at the time to be the top class in the nation.

 

I don't know about the 80's, but our recruiting rankings from 1990-1997 were 10th, 28th, 14th, 18th, 20th, 8th, 6th, and 19th according to SuperPrep. The majority of players from the domininant '95 team were from classes ranked 28th, 14th, 18th, and 20th. Now that was a different world in terms of recruiting coverage than it is today, so it's probably not like comparing apples to apples.

 

This brings me to EZ-E's post about Osborne's top recruiting classes being a myth. 8-25 is quite the range, and there is a significant on paper difference between the high and low. If 20-25 is a top recruiting class, I think Bo will meet or exceed this in most years. If the mark is 1-15, TO was batting .500 for the time period that I posted. It remains to be seen if Bo can match this in the long term.

 

fwiw, i've heard before of at least one top ranked class from the 80's. i think the 87 class with mickey joseph and nate turner was one, but am not certain. just did a search and saw where one husker site lists the 1985 NU class as having been emfinger's #1 recruiting class. in general, i think too many people have the idea that osborne won all those games with "blue collar" walk-ons. he knew the importance of getting difference makers and worked as hard as anyone at recruiting. he just went about it the right way.