Our Class Ranking?

[Mavric]

Perhaps I'm simply stewing in our conference play this season... Our turnover and field position issues have gotten worse, particularly this last season. It's hard to feel like progress is being made when these issues continue to plague the team. It was downright disheartening to see Nebraska come out and against Iowa the way they did. It was like watching Michigan State all over again.

 

Progress on defense was counteracted by stagnation/turnover issues on offense. It would be nice to see Nebraska put together a team that was consistent on both sides of the ball, the last time I've seen that was '10. So when I say 'competitive', I should be referring to a complete and consistent team. So, in that regard, I personally think we have regressed over the last 3 seasons.

While you may personally think this, Mavric is (IMO) presenting pretty telling facts that directly disagree with what you're saying.

Well, I think what he is stating is paritally true. Yes, we're 3-1 against those teams the last year and a half which suggests progression. However, he conveniently left out the blowout loss to Ohio State earlier in the year, which makes our record 3-2. This is only slightly more impressive, and win you consider that 2 of those wins were against a struggling Michigan team... it's not like those were program defining wins like say, a victory against an LSU.

I didn't conveniently leave anything out. Our record against all the five star teams is in the post.

 

And now you're hedging. This all started discussing recruiting success and how it can predict on field success. Have you totally abandoned that argument now and moved on to only worrying about on field success?

[Mavric]

it's not like those were program defining wins like say, a victory against an LSU.

By the way, LSU was 5-3 in the SEC this year. So was Georgia. One of LSU's three losses was to ... wait for it ... Georgia.

[robsker]

again my stating that NU has been #3 to # 5 at the seasons end each of the past 4 years is testimony suggesting that NU has been consistently upper middle of the conference... and qualitatively not legitimately competing for the best team in the conference (NU played Wis, and got rolled... during a season that OSU was ineligible... NU was, at best, #3 in the conference even though they were in the championship game). Does anybody really think NU was second best in the conference any of the past 4 years? Does anyone even think NU has been close to a conference championship level team these past 4 years? I didn't think so. That is the point. I used qualitative language "upper middle" to indicate that NU has been solid... but not a contender (even in a weak conference).

 

Now, back to the question at hand... NU does not appear to be regressing to me... or advancing. Seems NU is in a holding pattern. I also see no concrete reason to predict any meaningful or sustained regression or advance in the immediate future. What has been is... and seemingly will continue.

[robsker]

I know you did not have me in view with this, but...

 

Trying to make quantitative --- or semi-quantitative -- correlations of recruiting vs. on-field performance is interesting, provides surface area for debate and is a good diversion from work making a nice post to read, but... not very valuable predictively. One can state, generally --- and there are exceptions --- but generally.. programs that recruit well compete well & programs that do not recruit as well do not compete as well. Programs that perform below their recruiting level consistently are likely struggling with player development or have had a rash of injuries, tough schedule... or some other extenuating circumstances. Teams that over perform have great coaching.

 

As for NU. NU is not a top recruiting team nor is it a particularly competitive program. And... NU's recruiting does not appear to be --- in a sustained way --- trending. The 2012 and 2013 classes seem better than the two which preceded them and that looked like the beginning of a positive trend... but this class, at least on paper... is likely more akin to the earlier, lesser classes. So a sustained trend is seemingly not there.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Firstly, I apologize I can't quote the posts directly, the feature doesn't seem to be working correctly on my phone.

 

But, you did state that we're 3-1 against those teams in the last 1.5 years. Why leave out the Ohio State loss? I did try to present an argument that recruiting does matter, you stated that the article does not solve the chicken-egg question. I can't win that debate, it's impossible for me to change your opinion just like you can't change mine.

 

Still, I think recruiting has to be in the equation, I would argue its the second most important thing holding the team back, with turnovers being the most important.

[Mavric]

Does anybody really think NU was second best in the conference any of the past 4 years? Does anyone even think NU has been close to a conference championship level team these past 4 years? I didn't think so. That is the point. I used qualitative language "upper middle" to indicate that NU has been solid... but not a contender (even in a weak conference).

So your argument is it was a total fluke that we were ahead 17-0 in a conference championship game?

[Mavric]

But, you did state that we're 3-1 against those teams in the last 1.5 years. Why leave out the Ohio State loss?

Because that doesn't fall in the last 1.5 years?

[RedDenver]

again my stating that NU has been #3 to # 5 at the seasons end each of the past 4 years is testimony suggesting that NU has been consistently upper middle of the conference... and qualitatively not legitimately competing for the best team in the conference (NU played Wis, and got rolled... during a season that OSU was ineligible... NU was, at best, #3 in the conference even though they were in the championship game). Does anybody really think NU was second best in the conference any of the past 4 years? Does anyone even think NU has been close to a conference championship level team these past 4 years? I didn't think so. That is the point. I used qualitative language "upper middle" to indicate that NU has been solid... but not a contender (even in a weak conference).

 

Now, back to the question at hand... NU does not appear to be regressing to me... or advancing. Seems NU is in a holding pattern. I also see no concrete reason to predict any meaningful or sustained regression or advance in the immediate future. What has been is... and seemingly will continue.

Whether we got rolled pr not, we were in the B1G CCG - that's exactly what competing is. NU was in position to win the conference - OSU was not, regardless of the circumstance. Maybe you're leaving out the two extremely close B12 CCG because it was another conference, but that's about as close as you can get without winning it.

 

I agree with the rest of the post and with your next post. But I draw a slightly different conclusion - that we're consistently near the top of the conference, which means we're competitive enough to break through one of these years.

[Mavric]

I used qualitative language "upper middle" to indicate that NU has been solid... but not a contender (even in a weak conference).

So we've been in the CCG three of the last five years. And since we've joined the B1G, we have the third best record in conference play, barely behind two teams that were in the Top 5 last year and we only have a losing record against one team in conference (iirc), a team coming off a 20+ game winning streak. But we're not a contender. Got it.

[robsker]

again my stating that NU has been #3 to # 5 at the seasons end each of the past 4 years is testimony suggesting that NU has been consistently upper middle of the conference... and qualitatively not legitimately competing for the best team in the conference (NU played Wis, and got rolled... during a season that OSU was ineligible... NU was, at best, #3 in the conference even though they were in the championship game). Does anybody really think NU was second best in the conference any of the past 4 years? Does anyone even think NU has been close to a conference championship level team these past 4 years? I didn't think so. That is the point. I used qualitative language "upper middle" to indicate that NU has been solid... but not a contender (even in a weak conference).

 

Now, back to the question at hand... NU does not appear to be regressing to me... or advancing. Seems NU is in a holding pattern. I also see no concrete reason to predict any meaningful or sustained regression or advance in the immediate future. What has been is... and seemingly will continue.

 

I do see concrete reason to predict meaningful sustained advancement in the immediate future. I'm picking rivals just because I have the information available.

1. 2008 Rivals ranked class of 30
   
2. 2009 Rivals ranked class of 28
   
3. 2010 Rivals ranked class of 23
   
4. 2011 Rivals ranked class of 15
   

Now do the math...add 4 and 5 years to 2011 and 2010 to find out when the seniors are coming up to contribute their final 2 years.

 

 

Now think of the 2012 class and note that we had the 25th ranked class that year despite taking less than 20 scholarship players (harder to do) and then look at the names on that 2012 list. Almost every single one of those players are contributing NOW and are good players for us and I don't think anyone that reads those names would state that any of them aren't poised to contribute AT or ABOVE the same level they've contributed thus far.

 

So, we have 3 top 25 years of recruits coming into their sophomore, junior, and senior years of playing and contributing. THAT is a positive trend and it is getting more skilled players on the field than we EVER have had the entire time that Bo Pelini has been coaching. Think I'm nuts? The 2009 Seniors were recruited from recruiting class ranked 5th in 2005 by He-who-must-not-be-named....2009 we had our highest AP finish at 14th. We had lots of athletes contributing from a top ranked recruiting class.

 

Now look at our 2008 class and see if you recognize the names (rivals ranked 30th)...you'll notice that many of them did not live up to or exceed their ranking....because they didn't pan out or contribute much here at Nebraska. The same is true for the 2009 class...a lot of swings and misses...though it was better than 2008 (rivals ranked 28th).

 

I'm looking forward to the time where our 2010 and 2011 athletes begin contributing. That time is NOW...2014. They've been in the system for a few years...they've put on some muscle and matured and they've seen the coaching change churn STOP finally so they have some continuity.

 

I'm excited for this next year because our best recruits are moving into contributing roles. My optimism for 2014 is the highest it has been since before the 2010 season and I think I've given plenty of evidence for others to be excited about it as well.

 

Makes sense. And... I do not disagree that what you point out is reason to hope. I hope too. But I do not predict that NU will be much different next season anyway. NU under this staff just has not had it and every year there is reason to hope and yet... nothing changes much anyway. NU finds a way to appear hopeful about to break out and have that year the fans have wanted... and fall short (for different reasons each season... but the same reality... they fall short). So... my reservation about forward movement is more lack of faith that this staff can get it done. You and Mavric have good points re: reasons to expect improvement and they are rational. I just am unconvinced that when it comes down to it that this staff can get it done... at least in any sustained way. That is, I can see why you two predict improvement and your arguments have merit... I just remain unconvinced that actual improvement will be made (again in any sustained way).

[robsker]

I used qualitative language "upper middle" to indicate that NU has been solid... but not a contender (even in a weak conference).

So we've been in the CCG three of the last five years. And since we've joined the B1G, we have the third best record in conference play, barely behind two teams that were in the Top 5 last year and we only have a losing record against one team in conference (iirc), a team coming off a 20+ game winning streak. But we're not a contender. Got it.

 

upper middle is good. I never said it was not. Now... NU has been, as you say, #3. That is what I say too. And numerically the # 3 is close to the #1 and implies perhaps being a contender. But NU, upon closer inspection, has not been actually competitive with any of the conference champions these past 4 years. MSU this year, OSU teams since Meyer, or the Wisconsin teams... each were handily beyond NU in those respective seasons.

[Mavric]

I used qualitative language "upper middle" to indicate that NU has been solid... but not a contender (even in a weak conference).

So we've been in the CCG three of the last five years. And since we've joined the B1G, we have the third best record in conference play, barely behind two teams that were in the Top 5 last year and we only have a losing record against one team in conference (iirc), a team coming off a 20+ game winning streak. But we're not a contender. Got it.

upper middle is good. I never said it was not. Now... NU has been, as you say, #3. That is what I say too. And numerically the # 3 is close to the #1 and implies perhaps being a contender. But NU, upon closer inspection, has not been actually competitive with any of the conference champions these past 4 years. MSU this year, OSU teams since Meyer, or the Wisconsin teams... each were handily beyond NU in those respective seasons.

I seem to recall beating conference champ Wisconsin two years ago.....

[Redmusky]

We've been searching for that big win against a real team (a 'five-star' team if you will) for 4 or 5 years now, and we can't just seem to get over the hump.

We beat a five star team last month.

Well you see, Georgia was down and on injuries and you really can't count that...

 

Just be happy, people. Kool-aid.

We where down on injuries also

[Dr. Strangelove]

But, you did state that we're 3-1 against those teams in the last 1.5 years. Why leave out the Ohio State loss?

Because that doesn't fall in the last 1.5 years?

Perhaps it's better to address why you chose 1.5 seasons instead of 2. Doing that allowed you to ignore the Ohio State loss.

 

And while the victory against Wisconsin is great, they have pounded us twice and were a better team last season. They have been better than us each season since we joined the B1G.

[robsker]

But, you did state that we're 3-1 against those teams in the last 1.5 years. Why leave out the Ohio State loss?

Because that doesn't fall in the last 1.5 years?

Perhaps it's better to address why you chose 1.5 seasons instead of 2. Doing that allowed you to ignore the Ohio State loss.

 

And while the victory against Wisconsin is great, they have pounded us twice and were a better team last season. They have been better than us each season since we joined the B1G.

 

People on this site seem really to dislike Wisconsin. I don't blame them... I do not like them either. But people here dismiss them as well --- and that is just not reasonable at all. Redmusky is quite correct. Wisconsin has been better than NU each year since we were in conference. Same with OSU. And most years someone else has snuck in there too. People also dismiss last years Iowa team as if somehow it is inconceivable that Iowa could be better in a given year than NU. Well they were... last year. Over time, of course Wisconsin and Iowa fall far short of NU in the historic sense. That said, the last 10 years or so have been the weakest set of seasons in NU's past 40 or so years. NU is nothing --- not even a shadow of its former self. It is what it is.