The "Average" Class

[knapplc]

The concern is just that there are 17 kids in the class and not 20. I guess that's more a roster management issue. Plus, either the '10 or '11 classes was also trumped as a "this is a really small class, we are going to be real selective."

 

On average, there's just going to be a certain percentage of recruits that don't really pan out. Just look at the promise guys like Khiry Cooper - now a senior! - or Lazzari Middleton or Josh Mitchell or Josh Williams or any number of guys had. Or Dijon Washington, Ciante Evans, Qvale, etc, etc, a lot of still unknown quantities that could go either way. All those guys were very solid, promising recruits that were great additions to those classes.

 

The concerns about how behind we were in recruiting were mostly addressed in the closing weeks. I mean, we had an extremely fast paced January/NSD in terms of commits. We added Alexander, an OL (Whitaker?), and Cross shortly before NSD and added three more on the day itself. So much was up in the air before these six guys that concern really was justified.

 

Now it's just more of a numbers issue, because for this class to really be successful, we're going to need a high batting % out of it. The guys that we got were all pretty good gets, no complaints there.

 

This is all very true. There are definitely valid concerns about our recruiting methods, and we whiffed on a couple guys that we could really have used (Fuller & Peat). I'm not talking about those valid criticisms, I'm talking about the "world is ending" over-the-top nonsense.

[Goal-line]

 

A class can be judged today, but no one honestly ain't gonna know jack until two or three years down the road. So to dog and bag on this class now is purely assinine.

 

 

Yes, you are correct about the projection of talent until the tree ripens the fruit. However, this last season, the tree needed some really bad watering! My questions is, can the coaches turn on the hose?

[PaulCrewe]

 

A class can be judged today, but no one honestly ain't gonna know jack until two or three years down the road. So to dog and bag on this class now is purely assinine.

 

 

Yes, you are correct about the projection of talent until the tree ripens the fruit. However, this last season, the tree needed some really bad watering! My questions is, can the coaches turn on the hose?

Your post intrigues me, but is pretty vague. Please explain said process of cultivating a solid arboretum. What went wrong in the last planting season. I would like to banter with ya, but give me a not so watered down explanation.

[funhusker]

 

A class can be judged today, but no one honestly ain't gonna know jack until two or three years down the road. So to dog and bag on this class now is purely assinine.

 

 

Yes, you are correct about the projection of talent until the tree ripens the fruit. However, this last season, the tree needed some really bad watering! My questions is, can the coaches turn on the hose?

 

I pictured a Tibetan Monk...

 

(I get what your sayin')

['SkersRule]

Yes, you are correct about the projection of talent until the tree ripens the fruit. However, this last season, the tree needed some really bad watering! My questions is, can the coaches turn on the hose?

 

I haven't been here on this site long enough to get a sense of what people have said about this year's class. But some of the negative posts I've read on other supposed Nebraska sites regarding this year's class are the equivalent of toxic manure. In fairness the extremely negative types of posts are thankfully a small percentage compared to the overall aggregate.

[kchusker_chris]

People are upset about the rankings regarding a lower number of players...but when you figure 40-50% of recruits usually don't pan out...regardless of stars wouldn't you rather have a class of 25, than a class of 17? At 17 we have 8-9 that might crack the 2-deep. At 25 we'd have 12-13. That's 4-5 more quality players. That's the basis behind the benifits to oversigning. It's also the reason why a smaller class (regardless of average stars) is going to be ranked lower...because it should be ranked lower!

 

As much as they didn't work out in Nebraska's favor this year...the rankings pretty accurately portray the level of a class. Next year all of you "average stars" people are going to be talking about how highly ranked of a class we have with little regard to the stars (because they'll be down from this year) when we sign 25-28 guys. Then stars won't matter it's quantity. But I bet we get more into the 2-deep from next years class than this years. Just whatever fits your argument I guess.

 

(and Cincinnati signed 28, 25 of them 3*s and still found themselves at 49th).

Since I haven't heard a single word in regards to average stars (because then we'd rank 23rd) - which was all we heard last year (which admittedly that class is looking better than I originally thought) - I thought I'd bring the discussion up. Personally I like this year's class WAY more than last years. What do you guys think? I'm a numbers guy. More players, more potential, better team. I haven't been happy w/ Bo's roster management. It's looking better now that we've got that 2008 class of 100% redshirts out the door though.

[Count 'Bility]

People are upset about the rankings regarding a lower number of players...but when you figure 40-50% of recruits usually don't pan out...regardless of stars wouldn't you rather have a class of 25, than a class of 17? At 17 we have 8-9 that might crack the 2-deep. At 25 we'd have 12-13. That's 4-5 more quality players. That's the basis behind the benifits to oversigning. It's also the reason why a smaller class (regardless of average stars) is going to be ranked lower...because it should be ranked lower!

 

As much as they didn't work out in Nebraska's favor this year...the rankings pretty accurately portray the level of a class. Next year all of you "average stars" people are going to be talking about how highly ranked of a class we have with little regard to the stars (because they'll be down from this year) when we sign 25-28 guys. Then stars won't matter it's quantity. But I bet we get more into the 2-deep from next years class than this years. Just whatever fits your argument I guess.

 

(and Cincinnati signed 28, 25 of them 3*s and still found themselves at 49th).

Since I haven't heard a single word in regards to average stars (because then we'd rank 23rd) - which was all we heard last year (which admittedly that class is looking better than I originally thought) - I thought I'd bring the discussion up. Personally I like this year's class WAY more than last years. What do you guys think? I'm a numbers guy. More players, more potential, better team. I haven't been happy w/ Bo's roster management. It's looking better now that we've got that 2008 class of 100% redshirts out the door though.

I've really payed a lot more attention to recruiting this year. One thing I've quickly learned is that star numbers and rankings "can" be the most manipulated bunch of bs there is. Not all the time, but some of the time, which leads you to wonder how much of an agenda by the pubs there actually is. The Carter (TE) thing was intriguing. Didnt he gain a star when LSU came calling, and then one pub actually took the star back away when he re affirmed his committment. Didnt Finnin's ranking go up a bit when Urban Meyer came calling? Yes, there has to be talent, but there also has to be development as well. Ole Miss is possible going to get the top 3 players in the country, but I'll bet they still have to fight like hell to make a bowl game over the next 4 years-as usual. It's a two-way street with this recruiting thing. That's for damn sure.

[grandpasknee]

Been taking a break since the bowl game, but had to sign in tonight for two reasons. First, wanted to make sure I didn't forget my password. Good there.

 

Second, this is really the first year that I've followed the recruiting. If I understand correctly, we've taken 6 OL and 6 DL, with some sure enough studs on both sides. We've got a 4th year starting QB returning and enough running backs in the stable that someone the quality of Heard decided to split. A good possibility that we've got some redshirt LBs and DBs that will push the envelope on what is and isn't allowable punishment to the ball carrier. Receivers that, while not big name will catch the ball and get YAC. Makes it awfully hard to not just let loose and get all jacked up even though it's only early February.

 

 

2013

12 - 1

Division and Conference Champions

Not in the MNC, but a nice BCS bowl which we win convincingly

2014 Recruiting Class solid top 10.

 

 

 

Dang this mid winter koolaid is tasty!

 

! ! ! ! ! ! Go Big Red ! ! ! ! ! !

[caveman99]

Been taking a break since the bowl game, but had to sign in tonight for two reasons. First, wanted to make sure I didn't forget my password. Good there.

 

Second, this is really the first year that I've followed the recruiting. If I understand correctly, we've taken 6 OL and 6 DL, with some sure enough studs on both sides. We've got a 4th year starting QB returning and enough running backs in the stable that someone the quality of Heard decided to split. A good possibility that we've got some redshirt LBs and DBs that will push the envelope on what is and isn't allowable punishment to the ball carrier. Receivers that, while not big name will catch the ball and get YAC. Makes it awfully hard to not just let loose and get all jacked up even though it's only early February.

 

 

2013

12 - 1

Division and Conference Champions

Not in the MNC, but a nice BCS bowl which we win convincingly

2014 Recruiting Class solid top 10.

 

 

 

Dang this mid winter koolaid is tasty!

 

! ! ! ! ! ! Go Big Red ! ! ! ! ! !

I like where your head is at! Is it time for Spring Ball yet?

[caveman99]

People are upset about the rankings regarding a lower number of players...but when you figure 40-50% of recruits usually don't pan out...regardless of stars wouldn't you rather have a class of 25, than a class of 17? At 17 we have 8-9 that might crack the 2-deep. At 25 we'd have 12-13. That's 4-5 more quality players. That's the basis behind the benifits to oversigning. It's also the reason why a smaller class (regardless of average stars) is going to be ranked lower...because it should be ranked lower!

 

As much as they didn't work out in Nebraska's favor this year...the rankings pretty accurately portray the level of a class. Next year all of you "average stars" people are going to be talking about how highly ranked of a class we have with little regard to the stars (because they'll be down from this year) when we sign 25-28 guys. Then stars won't matter it's quantity. But I bet we get more into the 2-deep from next years class than this years. Just whatever fits your argument I guess.

 

(and Cincinnati signed 28, 25 of them 3*s and still found themselves at 49th).

Since I haven't heard a single word in regards to average stars (because then we'd rank 23rd) - which was all we heard last year (which admittedly that class is looking better than I originally thought) - I thought I'd bring the discussion up. Personally I like this year's class WAY more than last years. What do you guys think? I'm a numbers guy. More players, more potential, better team. I haven't been happy w/ Bo's roster management. It's looking better now that we've got that 2008 class of 100% redshirts out the door though.

Interesting thoughts. I have always been more of a person who looks at who offers more than stars, but I also tend to look at ave stars more than class rank. I did a bunch of analysis on ave star rank and class rank vs. BCS bowls that I have posted before. I am intrigued by the recent attrition discussion, a point I know you are passionate about, so I may have to dig those numbers out and figure out how to account for attrition plus unplanned production, walk ons, transfers, etc.