Epley's comments on Talent

[Elf]

 

 

 

Prominent media guy covering Huskers says it was definitely the athletic department that wanted this story out. Contacted both newspapers so they could do the interview together.

 

Also said it didn't go over all that well with everyone on the team.

Shocking.

 

<sarcasm>

 

And yet some people wonder why some of the players have reservations about playing for this AD and coaching staff.

 

 

 

When people start hiding things... information... the true reason why something was done... or said... then that should raise a RED FLAG.

 

The red flag indicates something is seriously wrong going on. Other wise they would have been honest about it.

 

 

The performance metrics of the players used to be made public during the Osborne days. After he left, all of the sudden, they stopped making them public. We suspected it was because the numbers-metrics had plummeted and they were trying to hide them. That turned out to be correct... they were hiding them form the public because they didn't want the truth to be known.

 

So comments are made by a prominent member of the program... right before a bowl game... and the true nature of the comments and why they were made public was misrepresented-hidden. So as in the case with the athletic performance numbers the red flag comes out again as it should.

 

The truth behind the athletic department controlled public relations pumping of this and the attempt to hide it... is at least as big a story as the comments if not a bigger story because it involves intentional misrepresentation and hiding of the truth.

 

When did they stop reporting testing results? Wasn't it when Callahan showed up?

 

If you read the whole thread, your buddy Frank stopped it and not a man you hate.

[GBRedneck]

 

 

 

 

Prominent media guy covering Huskers says it was definitely the athletic department that wanted this story out. Contacted both newspapers so they could do the interview together.

 

Also said it didn't go over all that well with everyone on the team.

Shocking.

 

<sarcasm>

 

And yet some people wonder why some of the players have reservations about playing for this AD and coaching staff.

 

 

 

When people start hiding things... information... the true reason why something was done... or said... then that should raise a RED FLAG.

 

The red flag indicates something is seriously wrong going on. Other wise they would have been honest about it.

 

 

The performance metrics of the players used to be made public during the Osborne days. After he left, all of the sudden, they stopped making them public. We suspected it was because the numbers-metrics had plummeted and they were trying to hide them. That turned out to be correct... they were hiding them form the public because they didn't want the truth to be known.

 

So comments are made by a prominent member of the program... right before a bowl game... and the true nature of the comments and why they were made public was misrepresented-hidden. So as in the case with the athletic performance numbers the red flag comes out again as it should.

 

The truth behind the athletic department controlled public relations pumping of this and the attempt to hide it... is at least as big a story as the comments if not a bigger story because it involves intentional misrepresentation and hiding of the truth.

 

When did they stop reporting testing results? Wasn't it when Callahan showed up?

 

If you read the whole thread, your buddy Frank stopped it and not a man you hate.

 

Hmmmm, from the Gerbil-Scar article:

 

"Not since the Frank Solich era that ended in 2003 has the Nebraska football program consistently released football testing results."

 

http://journalstar.com/sports/epley-says-football-testing-numbers-could-make-public-return/article_1fa3d4a9-3e21-5351-ae9e-4e8131996dc2.html

 

Oh and BTW, I don't hate anybody. Stop projecting your own character issues on me.

[Elf]

 

 

 

 

 

Prominent media guy covering Huskers says it was definitely the athletic department that wanted this story out. Contacted both newspapers so they could do the interview together.

 

Also said it didn't go over all that well with everyone on the team.

Shocking.

 

<sarcasm>

 

And yet some people wonder why some of the players have reservations about playing for this AD and coaching staff.

 

 

 

When people start hiding things... information... the true reason why something was done... or said... then that should raise a RED FLAG.

 

The red flag indicates something is seriously wrong going on. Other wise they would have been honest about it.

 

 

The performance metrics of the players used to be made public during the Osborne days. After he left, all of the sudden, they stopped making them public. We suspected it was because the numbers-metrics had plummeted and they were trying to hide them. That turned out to be correct... they were hiding them form the public because they didn't want the truth to be known.

 

So comments are made by a prominent member of the program... right before a bowl game... and the true nature of the comments and why they were made public was misrepresented-hidden. So as in the case with the athletic performance numbers the red flag comes out again as it should.

 

The truth behind the athletic department controlled public relations pumping of this and the attempt to hide it... is at least as big a story as the comments if not a bigger story because it involves intentional misrepresentation and hiding of the truth.

 

When did they stop reporting testing results? Wasn't it when Callahan showed up?

 

If you read the whole thread, your buddy Frank stopped it and not a man you hate.

 

Hmmmm, from the Gerbil-Scar article:

 

"Not since the Frank Solich era that ended in 2003 has the Nebraska football program consistently released football testing results."

 

http://journalstar.com/sports/epley-says-football-testing-numbers-could-make-public-return/article_1fa3d4a9-3e21-5351-ae9e-4e8131996dc2.html

 

Oh and BTW, I don't hate anybody. Stop projecting your own character issues on me.

 

The article doesn't give the exact date Solich stopped publishing the figures. It just says the last time the results were released was the Solich era that ended in 2003. (That doesn't automatically mean Solich released them every year of his tenure.) Do we have an exact year the test results were no longer published?

[skersfan]

Does it really matter who or what caused the change? All that should be important, is that concrete evidence has been given, we need to improve. No real benefit in blaming anyone, just figure out how to correct the problem.

 

Whether you support or hate Riley, the goal should be the same. Improvement on the recruiting side of the house. It seems they are making an effort to do that.

 

We need to quit living in the past, the 1990's are over, 2015 is basically over.

 

Goals are being set by the AD. That marks progress for me.

[GBRedneck]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Prominent media guy covering Huskers says it was definitely the athletic department that wanted this story out. Contacted both newspapers so they could do the interview together.

 

Also said it didn't go over all that well with everyone on the team.

Shocking.

 

<sarcasm>

 

And yet some people wonder why some of the players have reservations about playing for this AD and coaching staff.

 

 

 

When people start hiding things... information... the true reason why something was done... or said... then that should raise a RED FLAG.

 

The red flag indicates something is seriously wrong going on. Other wise they would have been honest about it.

 

 

The performance metrics of the players used to be made public during the Osborne days. After he left, all of the sudden, they stopped making them public. We suspected it was because the numbers-metrics had plummeted and they were trying to hide them. That turned out to be correct... they were hiding them form the public because they didn't want the truth to be known.

 

So comments are made by a prominent member of the program... right before a bowl game... and the true nature of the comments and why they were made public was misrepresented-hidden. So as in the case with the athletic performance numbers the red flag comes out again as it should.

 

The truth behind the athletic department controlled public relations pumping of this and the attempt to hide it... is at least as big a story as the comments if not a bigger story because it involves intentional misrepresentation and hiding of the truth.

 

When did they stop reporting testing results? Wasn't it when Callahan showed up?

 

If you read the whole thread, your buddy Frank stopped it and not a man you hate.

 

Hmmmm, from the Gerbil-Scar article:

 

"Not since the Frank Solich era that ended in 2003 has the Nebraska football program consistently released football testing results."

 

http://journalstar.com/sports/epley-says-football-testing-numbers-could-make-public-return/article_1fa3d4a9-3e21-5351-ae9e-4e8131996dc2.html

 

Oh and BTW, I don't hate anybody. Stop projecting your own character issues on me.

 

The article doesn't give the exact date Solich stopped publishing the figures. It just says the last time the results were released was the Solich era that ended in 2003. (That doesn't automatically mean Solich released them every year of his tenure.) Do we have an exact year the test results were no longer published?

 

I could've sworn that was one of the changes Callahan implemented. There would have been a big stink at the time if Solich had stopped reporting them. But my google fu failed me when trying to find a definitive answer.

 

EDIT: I was able to find at least some winter testing results online from '98-'03.

[4skers89]

 

I find it absolutely hilarious that some people are just aghast that the athletic department would think of planning news releases or certain statements out for PR.

Every single athletic department does that in the world.

It's even funnier that some people also don't think that happened during previous coaching staffs.

 

Totally agree. What's even better, is there are those that believe our athletic department has some sort of agenda and is able to influence the public regarding that agenda through the media. Especially after this little PR nightmare . . . link.

I must have skimmed the article when it first came out. I'm outraged now. Yoga 4 times a week!?

[Husker Psycho]

 

 

 

So....

 

You are honestly...with a straight face....telling me that if I had only worked harder when I was younger I could have been as good as Irving Fryer as a WR or Mike Rozier as a RB or Turner Gill as a QB...Or...if I so choose, I could have been the next Dave Rimington. All I was missing is the hard work they obviously put in.

 

 

BRB

 

I was a total sports nut the whole time I was growing up. I probably played in more than a thousand football games (city parks and school). We would sometimes play in 3 games every day in the summer in our cities parks plus playing at school in the fall. Great way to grow up.

 

And for guys who love the sport... the desire never leaves us... ever.

 

I hear ya. I have recurring dreams about playing football.

 

 

GBRedneck...

 

Yeah... I have "put me in coach" syndrome.

 

When I'm sitting in the stands at a football game I have this thing going on in the back of my mind that makes me want to run down on the field and tug on the coaches sleeve and beg him... "put me in coach"... "I can get that yard on 4th and 1 on the 17... just give me a chance".

 

LOL

[Elf]

Does it really matter who or what caused the change? All that should be important, is that concrete evidence has been given, we need to improve. No real benefit in blaming anyone, just figure out how to correct the problem.

 

Whether you support or hate Riley, the goal should be the same. Improvement on the recruiting side of the house. It seems they are making an effort to do that.

 

We need to quit living in the past, the 1990's are over, 2015 is basically over.

 

Goals are being set by the AD. That marks progress for me.

I agree with this. Boyd Epley has tested the team several times now and they are going in the right direction (test results are going up). So why isn't this good news?

[Elf]

I find it absolutely hilarious that some people are just aghast that the athletic department would think of planning news releases or certain statements out for PR.

 

Every single athletic department does that in the world.

 

It's even funnier that some people also don't think that happened during previous coaching staffs.

I just don't get why it has to be some sort of nefarious act on the part of some boogeyman named "Pedeyhorst", whoever that is....

 

I think it's awesome this stuff was made public again.

[Elf]

Here's something from the article that I think really bodes well for all Husker sports.

 

 

 

In the performance index, a score of 1,500 — or 500 on each of the three tests — would be good starting point for a Division I athlete, Epley said. Somewhere in the 1,800s, Epley said, is when players start to become pro-caliber. Ideally, he said, he’d like Nebraska to recruit as many 1,500-point athletes as possible and improve those by 600 points over the course of their careers.

The "Ideally" part sounds pretty awesome. Realistically, how many 1500 point athletes are available each year? I realize we probably aren't likely to land 1500+ players every single time, but I like seeing where we are now, and what our goals are for the future.

[Husker Psycho]

Here's something from the article that I think really bodes well for all Husker sports.

 

 

 

In the performance index, a score of 1,500 — or 500 on each of the three tests — would be good starting point for a Division I athlete, Epley said. Somewhere in the 1,800s, Epley said, is when players start to become pro-caliber. Ideally, he said, he’d like Nebraska to recruit as many 1,500-point athletes as possible and improve those by 600 points over the course of their careers.

The "Ideally" part sounds pretty awesome. Realistically, how many 1500 point athletes are available each year? I realize we probably aren't likely to land 1500+ players every single time, but I like seeing where we are now, and what our goals are for the future.

 

You got that part right.

 

With Nebraska's current recruiting class ranking of 44th... where are those players going to come from ?

 

And isn't every other program in the country recruiting those players ?

 

Our coaches and recruiters have to deliver. Poor recruiting cant go on any longer. It has to stop now.

[Elf]

 

Here's something from the article that I think really bodes well for all Husker sports.

 

 

 

In the performance index, a score of 1,500 — or 500 on each of the three tests — would be good starting point for a Division I athlete, Epley said. Somewhere in the 1,800s, Epley said, is when players start to become pro-caliber. Ideally, he said, he’d like Nebraska to recruit as many 1,500-point athletes as possible and improve those by 600 points over the course of their careers.

The "Ideally" part sounds pretty awesome. Realistically, how many 1500 point athletes are available each year? I realize we probably aren't likely to land 1500+ players every single time, but I like seeing where we are now, and what our goals are for the future.

 

You got that part right.

 

With Nebraska's current recruiting class ranking of 44th... where are those players going to come from ?

 

And isn't every other program in the country recruiting those players ?

 

Our coaches and recruiters have to deliver. Poor recruiting cant go on any longer. It has to stop now.

 

The recruiting class isn't done yet, patience young padawan...

 

I agree though, it all starts with recruiting and we have to recruit better than we have in the past, especially on the O-Line.

[GBRedneck]

 

I find it absolutely hilarious that some people are just aghast that the athletic department would think of planning news releases or certain statements out for PR.

 

Every single athletic department does that in the world.

 

It's even funnier that some people also don't think that happened during previous coaching staffs.

I just don't get why it has to be some sort of nefarious act on the part of some boogeyman named "Pedeyhorst", whoever that is....

 

I think it's awesome this stuff was made public again.

 

I agree that testing results should be public. But the timing and the commentary that went along with it ("These players suck and that's why we had a losing season") is counter productive and demotivating for the team. Pederson did the same thing publicy in '04. How did that work out?

[DomiNUs]

 

 

I find it absolutely hilarious that some people are just aghast that the athletic department would think of planning news releases or certain statements out for PR.

 

Every single athletic department does that in the world.

 

It's even funnier that some people also don't think that happened during previous coaching staffs.

I just don't get why it has to be some sort of nefarious act on the part of some boogeyman named "Pedeyhorst", whoever that is....

 

I think it's awesome this stuff was made public again.

 

I agree that testing results should be public. But the timing and the commentary that went along with it ("These players suck and that's why we had a losing season") is counter productive and demotivating for the team. Pederson did the same thing publicy in '04. How did that work out?

 

 

I missed the part in the articles where this was said. Guess I should've put on the reading glasses.

[Husker Psycho]

 

 

 

 

I find it absolutely hilarious that some people are just aghast that the athletic department would think of planning news releases or certain statements out for PR.

 

Every single athletic department does that in the world.

 

It's even funnier that some people also don't think that happened during previous coaching staffs.

I just don't get why it has to be some sort of nefarious act on the part of some boogeyman named "Pedeyhorst", whoever that is....

 

I think it's awesome this stuff was made public again.

 

I agree that testing results should be public. But the timing and the commentary that went along with it ("These players suck and that's why we had a losing season") is counter productive and demotivating for the team. Pederson did the same thing publicy in '04. How did that work out?

 

 

I missed the part in the articles where this was said. Guess I should've put on the reading glasses.

 

 

 

Don't you know that by NOT saying those things, they actually said them without saying them?

 

 

 

 

 

" but in football we need to do a better job of bringing in talented recruits so we don't have to do quite so much development or quite so much coaching."