LJS checks in on our top ten recruiting class.

[NUpolo8]

Not to get all thread happy up in here but I found this article interesting (I did not, however, find the survey I had to take to read the article interesting. You kinda suck, journal star)

 

http://journalstar.com/sports/huskers/life-in-the-red/recruiting-a-summer-without-booms/article_36ede520-0621-11e4-8b22-0019bb2963f4.html

 

So I'm sure we all remember the call of "ZOMG! We have a top ten recruiting class!", that bubbled out earlier, so I'm pretty glad someone followed up, because it's now scratching around the top 25.

 

Now, obviously you can say this is a quality over quantity issue, which could be true. You could say the rankings mean nothing, which is probably true, but then you don't get to use them as a defense. You could also say this points to the sporadic recruiting this staff seems to like to do, or you can say they got their guys.

 

Really, I just liked this article as a follow up to what we were talking about earlier in the year, I just couldn't find an appropriate older thread to add it to.

[Saunders]

It's simply based on numbers. This was going to be a small class, and it was a bit frontloaded. We seem to do well in the fall when we can get guys on campus for officials (the start date for this needs to be moved to earlier in the year). I think our cap is 17-19 guys, so unless it was all 4-5 star guys, pretty much no shot of top 10. Now, top 20-25? Yes, it needs to be. This isn't surprising, and not at all unexpected.

[junior4949]

If we're at #12 based on star rating, I'm not sure anything else really matters. It should always be about quality over quantity.

[NUpolo8]

If we're at #12 based on star rating, I'm not sure anything else really matters. It should always be about quality over quantity.

 

It should probably be about quantities of quality in our quiver. But I don't want to quibble or mess with our qi.

 

About that though, when depth is an issue on this squad, I wonder why the small class has to happen. Yes I understand about scholarship limits, but it's instances like this where I'm evolving towards a cleaner, above board system that other programs run similar to the Bama's of the world.

 

In other words, try to get a little more talent in the walk on program. Obviously winning would help that.

[NUance]

As that goes, the average star rating of Nebraska's 10 recruits according to Rivals is 3.44, which ties for 12th nationally. The team tied with NU is Texas A&M, which is ranked No. 2 by Rivals because its star ranking average is based off of 18 recruits compared to Nebraska's 10.

It seems silly to scale class score linearly by class size. Doesn't that just reward programs with high rates of attrition?

[Junior]

If we're at #12 based on star rating, I'm not sure anything else really matters. It should always be about quality over quantity.

 

I disagree. If we take five 4* players and ten 3* players, and Wisconsin takes five 4* players and thirteen 3* players, well our overall star # is higher... but would you really say we had a better class?

[C N Red]

A lot of our recruits ratings have dropped. Why? B/c many are not going to camps put on by rating services. That right there tells you everything you need to know about rankings recruits and why some players get ranked higher or lower. You pay to come to our camp we'll be more likely to rate you higher. Its all business and these rankings are becoming more and more biased and irrevelant.

[True2tRA]

"we have a 45th rated class......meh, ratings schmatings, stars don't mean anything."

 

 

"we have a top ten rated class! Man we got some really good players coming in this year!"

[jsneb83]

"we have a 45th rated class......meh, ratings schmatings, stars don't mean anything."

 

 

"we have a top ten rated class! Man we got some really good players coming in this year!"

If you have a top ten class, you don't really need the recruiting services to tell you how good they are.

[Abdullah the Butcher]

 

"we have a 45th rated class......meh, ratings schmatings, stars don't mean anything."

"we have a top ten rated class! Man we got some really good players coming in this year!"

If you have a top ten class, you don't really need the recruiting services to tell you how good they are.

 

but the recruiting services are the ones that rate it as a top ten class....

[darkhorse85]

Am I completely missing something here Polo or did you just mistype? The article you linked was written by Christopherson.

[Saunders]

 

If we're at #12 based on star rating, I'm not sure anything else really matters. It should always be about quality over quantity.

 

I disagree. If we take five 4* players and ten 3* players, and Wisconsin takes five 4* players and thirteen 3* players, well our overall star # is higher... but would you really say we had a better class?

 

Would you say it was worse?

[NUpolo8]

Am I completely missing something here Polo or did you just mistype? The article you linked was written by Christopherson.

I mistyped. I'm dense, you see.

[darkhorse85]

 

Am I completely missing something here Polo or did you just mistype? The article you linked was written by Christopherson.

I mistyped. I'm dense, you see.

 

 

We all are. I kept looking for the Sipple article. I drank a few too many Steveweisers this weekend.

[Junior]

 

 

If we're at #12 based on star rating, I'm not sure anything else really matters. It should always be about quality over quantity.

 

I disagree. If we take five 4* players and ten 3* players, and Wisconsin takes five 4* players and thirteen 3* players, well our overall star # is higher... but would you really say we had a better class?

 

Would you say it was worse?

 

 

On the surface, without looking at the specifics of who the players are... yes. Ultimately recruiting is a numbers game. Trying to bring in enough players that you have a few that are "hits". The more players you bring in, the more likely you are to get a "hit". That's why oversigning is so important to the SEC.