McKewon on Husker Recruiting

[True2tRA]

 

One thing I'll add - going off preseason All-Conference/All-American lists, Sam certainly isn't alone. I know Phil Steele, for example, only has one Husker on his All-American AND All-Conference list - DPE. He's got Westerkamp on 2nd team All-Conference and then a smattering of players filling out the third and fourth team.

 

The season can change perceptions and players can emerge, without question. But, even now, the perception of our roster's talent isn't great. I'm having a hard time imagining many players sneaking into 2nd team, let alone 1st team all conference. There's a couple of guys who I think could emerge but that's about it, personally.

 

Several here on this forum predicting quite a few Huskers in the 2 deep- and reason why NU beats Wisconsin

I guess they know more than the experts

Actually, almost every expert I've heard has said Nebraska has more talent than Wisconsin. Really the question is whether Riley, Langsdorf, and Banker will better utilize that talent to result in playmakers making plays. We've got playmakers on both sides of the ball. Tommy, Pierson-El, Westerkamp are easily on the list offensively. Gerry, Banderas, Collins and Velentine on defense. There's seven right there. Let's hope this staff creates a few more.

[jmfb]

Individually maybe

But WIsconsin has 8 kids back and the DC from the #4 ranked D in the country

They may match us on the 2 deep with their RB and S, not that I think those lists matter that much

And none of the kids that graduated were drafted, so they didnt lose a Gregory etc

Low scoring game

[Enhance]

 

 

Actually I would say it is very common to most teams. Even OSU came close to losing a couple of games that they won. Penn St in OT, Minnesota was close, Indiana gave them everything they wanted. It is very rare for even a championship team to go through a year without a scare or two during the season. Look at FSU last year they could have lost about 6 games that they eventually won. Luck and the bounce of the ball is always a big part of a championship season.

 

Back to the original premise of SMc article, I still disagree that the talent is somewhere between 7-5 and 9-4. The talent is good enough to win 10+ games.

You're probably right, but, it still just sits funny with me. It seems like Nebraska is typically always just one play away from either winning or losing several games. Parody in college football is so much crazier now more than ever, but, I think ours was definitely more than luck or bounce of a ball. Those types of games happened at least once or twice a year for years around here, and we stayed right on the 9-win platform. In our case, I think bad luck eventually ruled itself out.

 

Also, I do think most people here would agree the talent is capable of 10 + wins, but this relies on coaching and potential. I think Sam is seeing no Gregory on the edge, a missing Abdullah, a shaky-at-times QB, an OL that needs work and lack of depth in some parts of the defense. Coaching can improve all these things, but going off just the talent, he's seeing ~8 wins.

 

The reason why you see it happening with Nebraska is that you watch the team more closely and root for the team. You have a vested interest in what happens. That is why you see a close game against McNeese St for Nebraska and it upsets you. But, you see Penn St. take OSU to OT and don't think much of it.

 

As far as Phil Steele is concerned, I think he is crazy to not have Gerry or Collins on his first team. I think they both made some 2nd teams last year.

 

PSU taking tOSU into OT is not the equivalent of Nebraska needing a Herculean/miraculous effort from Abdullah to beat a sub-division football squad. Not many teams can say they almost lost to the likes of a McNeese St. at home, and then almost beat a Top 10 ranked team on the road a couple of weeks later. I don't think many teams have been quite at Jekyll and Hyde as Nebraska in the last several years, even with the 9 wins.

 

The people Phil put in front of Gerry and Collins don't really bother me. I think Maliek probably should've been second team, but Gerry definitely is not deserving of first team yet in my opinion. An argument is fair for second team, but, he's up against some very good players.

[Mavric]

You mean like the 1994 Huskers trailing a Wyoming team that would finish 6-6 by seven points at the half and needed a fumbled punt by Wyoming late in the fourth quarter to put the game away?

Or the 1997 Huskers trailing Central Florida - second year in FBS - by three at the half and needed a late TD to put the game away?

[NUinID]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Do I think NU athletes underperformed under Pelini

Yes, but with the exception of QBs and a few others- individually the skill development wasnt bad for many players. Team execution,scheme management, team development, roster management, game management, team chemistry etc was very poor under Pelini,

 

Ive seen the study cited, it puts Pelini and Riley on similar ground as far as outperforming their talent. Both performed about where the talent said they would, nothing more, nothing less

 

So the big advantage we are supposed to get from Riley as far as player development as individuals, there isnt any evidence to say that is true. OTOH one can hope and NU certainly wouldnt expect to get worse when it comes to the things Pelinis teams struggled with- turnovers, meltdowns, untimely penalties, poor roster management etc To say NU automatically with Riley at the Helm is now a 10, 11 or 12 win team- just cant be counted on. Riley has no track record of putting together those type of teams. Dennis Erickson did better at OSU than Riley did and where is Dennis Erickson in the strata of College Coaches?

,

Does NU have the talent to be a 10 win team or maybe even 11? Sure, but many teams can say that and NU has had the talent and not realized it for quite some time.

LOTS of factors beyond talent go into putting together an 11 win season- ask any coach.

But having potential doesnt mean anyone actually realizes it. Coach Riley hasnt shown he can do it either.

 

The cup isnt overflowing either- we weak/unproven at DE, LB and RB we are unproven and have very little depth at other spots including QB, OL

 

Erickson did that with the players that Riley put into place. Whether Riley could have done the same thing at OSU with those players we will never know.

 

I agree with the first part of the bolded statement. The skill player development has not been bad at all. Even at QB you are only going to do so much when you take an athlete that is not a great passer and make him pass 25+ times a game.

 

The second part of the bolded are all things that BP was poor at that I think Riley will improve upon. To me those things that Riley can improve may be worth an increase of at least 1 win a year.

 

I would like to see the study you speak about. Because I think for the most part MR has outperformed his talent most years. The last couple of years no, but I have always felt he puts a competitive product on the field.

 

You coach FB I think, I coached for 20 plus years the last 15 at Norfolk HS. We never had the most talent, we never had the most size, but we always came to play and our head coach IMO was the most innovative offensive mind in the state. The Millards and LSE of the world never liked playing us because it was going to be a dogfight. They most likely would win, but they would be licking their wounds.

 

Most the PAC 12 coaches really didn't to want to play OSU. You always got a dog fight from a Riley coached team.

 

I am excited to see what Riley can do with a lot more talent.

Here is the study

http://regressing.deadspin.com/chart-which-ncaa-football-teams-outplay-their-recruit-1640831522

 

There isnt any evidence that Riley has outperformed his recruiting- it's on the same level as Pelini more or less

 

Dennis Erickson won 64% of his games at OSU- was 8-5 his last year with only his recruits. 8-5 OSU under Riley would have been considered a very good year- so on par with that.

Riley was at 53%

 

So pretty similar results for both there- Erickson was better even if you take away Rileys first 2 years

 

Time will tell,. I hope he does it, but there isnt anything out there that says- like Urban Meyer the guy wins everywhere he goes, and does it right away. He's not anywhere near that level at all.

 

As to luck people are talking about, yeah the Texas loss was a bad deal/. HOWEVER NU has been a huge recipeint of the ball bouncing the right way- Colorado, Northwestern, Iowa, McNeese State, Wyoming etc etc We are so much closer to 8 wins than 11- not worth talking about.

 

I just dont get the unrealistic optimism so many fans have EVERY YEAR this time of year for NU with little to no factual basis to back it up. Putting the name Riley at the HC spot guarantees us nothing at this point with the exception of better PR. Glad Bos gone, but dont get the 10-11-12 win guys with this coaching staff and roster

Erickson was there for 2 years. Riley was there for 14? Not a real good statistical analysis.

 

I have seen that graph and article before. OSU actually does perform a little over its recruiting. If NU moves off that line as much as OSU is off the line we are more than likely looking at 1 more win a year on average.

 

As far as unrealistic optimism goes its called being a fan. What fun is it to be doom and gloom all the time. I don't get people predicting a 7 loss season, because past results says we should win 9 games this year.

Wrong Erickson was there for 4 years, my analysis at least knows how many years the guy coached there

Even taking out Rileys first 2 years- Rileys next 12 werent better than Ericksons EVEN if you take out Rileys recruiting classes from Erickson. Someone here also stared Erickson brought in a bunch of contributors on his own in that 11-1 season in his second year

Right after Rileys first 2- so not even after OSU kind of got righted

 

NU and OSU were in the very same grouping- performed about same as recruiting, nothing more or less

 

I havent seen anyone predicting 7 losses- but our team has consistently won 9, some very lucky 9 win seasons

The new guys stats say he performs about same as the old guys-That doesnt make us a 10-11-12 win team unless youre a coolaid drinker/blinders IMO especially with a group in its first year in the Big

Fine with me you win the statistical pissing match.

When you are attempting to debate facts- stats, it's best if you actually have them- or at least dont tell the guy who does have them, that he is wrong when a simple google search shows he isnt

 

Kind of important- since many are saying Riley did such a great job at OSU that no one could ever replicate

Well Erickson did and did a better job- statistically right inbetween Rileys stints

 

Or I guess we can just go by gut feel, intuition, emotion or the like

That is why I said you win. You can win the stat contest

[Guy Chamberlin]

 

 

I just dont get the unrealistic optimism so many fans have EVERY YEAR this time of year for NU with little to no factual basis to back it up. Putting the name Riley at the HC spot guarantees us nothing at this point with the exception of better PR. Glad Bos gone, but dont get the 10-11-12 win guys with this coaching staff and roster

 

 

Well yeah, part of it is that optimism is free and you know...why not?

 

But I've seen a lot more tempered realism around here than you do.

 

2008 - optimistic, deservedly.

2009 - optimistic, deservedly.

2010 - cautious, coming off a nightmare offensive season and an unsettled QB situation. Offense needed to be better and it was.

2011 - concerned. What the hell happened in 2010? Could Taylor Martinez recover? Was defensive drop-off just a blip?

2012 - optimistic, sort of. Taylor seemed healthy and improved. Good skill position players. Bo was going to right the defense and silence the doubters. Oops.

2013 - all bets are off. This appears to be Bo Pelini's ceiling. Optimism and Pessimism depend on how you feel about 9 wins and 4 losses. Martinez is injured. Miracles, meltdowns and general chaos ensues. The Bo Pelini deathwatch is official.

2014 - ???? As I recall, Husker nation was all over the place. A touch of optimism for Tommy Armstrong, a groundswell for Ameer, a hint the defense had turned the corner. All of which proved to be true, but none if it seemed to matter by season's end.

2015 - New coach. Revelations about the old coach and staff explain some of the under-performance issues. A solid roster of returning talent, a major upgrade in assistant coaching, a positive attitude emerging from all involved in the program. Boyd Epply back in the house. If you're not optimistic, why be a fan?

 

Then again, there's a difference between optimism and expectation. I'm hopeful, but I'm not about to put my own money on an 11 win season.

 

I'm just seeing people who think there's no reason we CAN'T pick up an extra win, and a lot more people who would be satisfied to see the team play more consistently and meltdown-free.

[zoogs]

You mean like the 1994 Huskers trailing a Wyoming team that would finish 6-6 by seven points at the half and needed a fumbled punt by Wyoming late in the fourth quarter to put the game away?

Or the 1997 Huskers trailing Central Florida - second year in FBS - by three at the half and needed a late TD to put the game away?

Man. You're like a walking encyclopedia. Good memory

 

So I think the lesson there is one game does not define a season. Even great teams can have these close calls and honestly, poor games...before going out, dominating the rest of the field, and finishing strong. These are the teams for whom, at season's end, those poor games are the outliers, not the tone setters.

 

There was a time when the Huskers were 6-1 last year and a major run was conceivable. Had that happened, the early season struggle would've been a forgotten bump in the road.

 

Instead, it was the kind of lackluster performance not so far removed from the late season showings of what ended up being just another team on the Top 25 bubble.

[jsneb83]

 

 

 

And you still haven't given an example of a coach that had a worse record than the year before he got there.

 

 

That's because coaches don't get fired after 9-10 win seasons. But yes I did. Charlie Strong.

Arkansas? Twice?

[Enhance]

You mean like the 1994 Huskers trailing a Wyoming team that would finish 6-6 by seven points at the half and needed a fumbled punt by Wyoming late in the fourth quarter to put the game away?

Or the 1997 Huskers trailing Central Florida - second year in FBS - by three at the half and needed a late TD to put the game away?

Good teams sometimes struggle against bad teams - that's sports. But, there's a monumental difference between having close calls and winning national titles over having close calls, falling out of the Top 25 and settling for 9 win seasons. Routinely.

 

You bring up '97 Huskers trailing Central Florida, a team that went on to win a national title. You compare a '94 squad trailing Wyoming, a team that went on to win the national title. These aren't fair comparisons.

 

I'm talking about a team that almost lost to a sub-division school, then almost beat a top 10 team on the road, followed weeks later by a blowout loss to Wisconsin and needing OT to get beyond a VERY average Iowa team. Are we really trying to compare that type of a season to the same one tOSU had last year? Or to a Husker national title season? What???

 

And Zoogs was talking about how Nebraska was 6-1 and poised to "make a run?" We went on to beat three teams with a combined record of 16-21, followed up by the Wisconsin embarrassment. IMHO Nebraska has been skirting the edges of collapse for a long time, almost entirely due to coaching.

 

I'm hungry for success like everyone else is, but until Riley shows he can coach these guys up and get them playing to their potential, we should be fully prepared for the possibility of an ~8 win season.

[zoogs]

Yes, I feel that way as well. It seemed to be a team closer to skirting collapse for the last two seasons. In 2010 and 2012, the team was poised to really make a statement -- and blew it, fantastically, both times.

 

I actually think Bo should maybe get a lot of credit. Yes, on the one hand, he's responsible for the state of the '13 and '14 rosters. On the other hand, those same teams likely blow it in those seasons under most other coaches. Instead, Bo kept them together and got 9 wins in each -- a few lucky bounces away from even more, and a few unlucky bounces away from just less.

 

It's just too bad it had to be such an unhealthy atmosphere to get us there. And that wasn't worth it. I'd rather have won 6 and 7 games in the last two years and chalked them up as bad seasons, with a coach who wasn't mouthing off to his guys about the fans or the AD. It's not like there are any trophies for NU's 13 and 14 records. And it's not like those 9-4 seasons set us up to be power players in 15.

[Landlord]

 

 

 

And you still haven't given an example of a coach that had a worse record than the year before he got there.

 

 

That's because coaches don't get fired after 9-10 win seasons. But yes I did. Charlie Strong.

Arkansas? Twice?

 

 

 

Coaches don't get fired for being bad coaches**** after 9-10 win seasons. Petrino got fired because of scandal, not because of not winning enough, so it would kind of make sense that his predecessor didn't do so great, because he was an amazing coach. Nutt resigned on his own after a final three years of 4-7, 10-4, and 8-4.

[Red Five]

 

I just dont get the unrealistic optimism so many fans have EVERY YEAR this time of year for NU with little to no factual basis to back it up.

 

Shame on us rubes who think that Nebraska has a chance to beat Wisconsin in Lincoln.

[Sargon]

[Hoosker]

Those GODDAMN BADGERS!!!

[Red Five]

The bottom of that chart shows why B1G has sucked so bad recently. My goodness Purdue, Michgan, Indiana, and Illinois.