Jump to content


Nebraska Team Composite Ranking


Wordek

Recommended Posts


Not bad. 23rd is really in the Tier 2 of talent, which I think ranges from around 12 or 16 to 35 or 40 during a given year.

 

The key for Nebraska will be remaining toward the top 1/3 of tier 2 team talent and getting top 15 results out of that talent (i.e., coaching them up a tier.. which you see a lot of great coaches do (e.g., Baylor)).

Link to comment

The stars may lie but the numbers never do.....Many of Bo's stars never made it the field.

 

 

The ranking is based on the current roster and accounts for kids who have left.

 

I would bet the running average at signing day during the past 5 years was around 20-25, so this would indicate that NU's attrition was no worse than most schools (though not better either).

 

Would be nice to see a comparison of signing day rankings against these "team composite rankings" as of the end of a regular season. Wonder, for example, where a team like Iowa may fall (low on the signing day list, but maybe they have retained more of their players than others... then again, they started more walkons than NU did this year, so maybe not).

Link to comment

 

 

 

The stars may lie but the numbers never do.....Many of Bo's stars never made it the field.

The OP is only referencing players currently on the roster.

 

BTW, where's the link to this info?

 

http://247sports.com/Season/2015-Football/CollegeTeamTalentComposite

 

 

 

Surprised to see Navy at 123...

 

Aren't they ranked about #20 in the AP poll currently?

 

How DO they do it??? Junior astronomers need to know.

Link to comment

We are ranked 23 in current recruit talent on the team based off their recruiting rankings.

 

5 Stars: 0

 

4 Stars: 21

 

3 Stars: 54

 

Michigan State who is playing in the CFP is one spot ahead of us at 23. Iowa is 52.

 

http://247sports.com/Season/2015-Football/CollegeTeamTalentComposite

 

Interesting numbers!!! Two things that come to my mind that could be used to adjust this ranking:

1) upper classman VS under classman - a 4* senior lineman would be a lot more valuable than a 4* freshman lineman

2) having 6 3* players in one position group and then having 4/6 4* players in another position group wouldn't be as good as having your 4* spread out across the team.

 

I think this could be said about our team - we have most of our line talent as underclassman(exception Collins) and we have a couple position groups that aren't balanced between 3* / 4*

Link to comment

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The stars may lie but the numbers never do.....Many of Bo's stars never made it the field.

The OP is only referencing players currently on the roster.

 

BTW, where's the link to this info?

http://247sports.com/Season/2015-Football/CollegeTeamTalentComposite

 

Surprised to see Navy at 123...

Aren't they ranked about #20 in the AP poll currently?

 

How DO they do it??? Junior astronomers need to know.

Navy doesn't change their program. They run the ball. And they get some good players.
  • Fire 1
Link to comment

 

We are ranked 23 in current recruit talent on the team based off their recruiting rankings.

 

5 Stars: 0

 

4 Stars: 21

 

3 Stars: 54

 

Michigan State who is playing in the CFP is one spot ahead of us at 23. Iowa is 52.

 

http://247sports.com/Season/2015-Football/CollegeTeamTalentComposite

 

Interesting numbers!!! Two things that come to my mind that could be used to adjust this ranking:

1) upper classman VS under classman - a 4* senior lineman would be a lot more valuable than a 4* freshman lineman

2) having 6 3* players in one position group and then having 4/6 4* players in another position group wouldn't be as good as having your 4* spread out across the team.

 

I think this could be said about our team - we have most of our line talent as underclassman(exception Collins) and we have a couple position groups that aren't balanced between 3* / 4*

 

 

This pretty much sums up our problem. Of course we have some good/great talent. However, a lot of that talent is loaded up in just a couple different position groups. Some of our recruiting especially at RB, QB, and WR over the past several years has been baffling while almost ignoring other position groups.

Link to comment

I wonder where this ranks compared to last year.

 

Just googling, it looks like this may be the first year that they compiled a list like this.

 

I really think we fired Bo too soon... the staff from 2014 would have had a great opportunity to go 10-2 or better against the schedule this year, especially with the experienced talent that came back.

Link to comment

 

 

We are ranked 23 in current recruit talent on the team based off their recruiting rankings.

 

5 Stars: 0

 

4 Stars: 21

 

3 Stars: 54

 

Michigan State who is playing in the CFP is one spot ahead of us at 23. Iowa is 52.

 

http://247sports.com/Season/2015-Football/CollegeTeamTalentComposite

 

Interesting numbers!!! Two things that come to my mind that could be used to adjust this ranking:

1) upper classman VS under classman - a 4* senior lineman would be a lot more valuable than a 4* freshman lineman

2) having 6 3* players in one position group and then having 4/6 4* players in another position group wouldn't be as good as having your 4* spread out across the team.

 

I think this could be said about our team - we have most of our line talent as underclassman(exception Collins) and we have a couple position groups that aren't balanced between 3* / 4*

 

 

This pretty much sums up our problem. Of course we have some good/great talent. However, a lot of that talent is loaded up in just a couple different position groups. Some of our recruiting especially at RB, QB, and WR over the past several years has been baffling while almost ignoring other position groups.

 

 

 

Out of curiosity, which recruits were taken at those positions that shouldn't have been?

 

It's also worth noting that recruiting isn't like grocery shopping. You don't get to necessarily make a list and pick up the exact number of prospects at each position that you intend to. There have been recruiting misses under every staff, but other than over-recruiting of JUCOs under Callahan, I don't think there's much evidence of massive roster mismanagement. Not when you compare the NU roster to all other rosters in the B10 and against top 30 rosters.

  • Fire 1
Link to comment

I wonder where this ranks compared to last year.

 

Just googling, it looks like this may be the first year that they compiled a list like this.

 

I really think we fired Bo too soon... the staff from 2014 would have had a great opportunity to go 10-2 or better against the schedule this year, especially with the experienced talent that came back.

10-2 seems a little optimistic.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

Visit the Sports Illustrated Husker site



×
×
  • Create New...