Recent Recruiting Success & Failure

[I am I]

My whole problem with that spin on Epley's comments, which I think taken some of his statements well out of context, is that NU has been competitive during the past 7 years. NC championship competitive? No. And his comments are no revelation on that point (nor would I think he'd claim them to be). But, NU has been a .700+ program, constantly in the top 25 and able to play in 3 conference championships between 2008 and 2014 (or 4 in a span of 9 years, if you include 2006). That's despite a conference switch, too.

 

So, for people to now say, "well, 6-7 is a reflection of our talent level" seems pretty misguided. If this staff takes 9-3 talent to 5-7, will they do better than take 12-0 talent to 8-4? I don't know. We'll see.

 

Personally, I look at the "we recruit everywhere" approach as something akin to a Notre Dame-lite approach. I don't think it's a great model for NU, but I won't rehash why that argument, except to say: I think systems should take the following approach:

 

1. Identify your recruiting base. For Nebraska, I think it's the 500 mile radius, plus a column across the B10 territory, which would be supplemented with cherry picked athletes from the coastal states/big football territories. For all the attacks on my argument, people seem to miss that I actually don't know (or claim to know) whether RIley will take this approach. Yes, the articles are all about the relationships in Cali, but we don't know that this year may be an anomaly because of the close relationship with the Calabasas HS.

 

2. Once you understand the recruiting base, develop your offensive system around the type of talent you're able to consistently attract and retain. For me, that's when I look to TO for guidance. Also, I"m a true believer that at the college level, the option and a mobile QB are keys to a dynamic offense. I freely admit my belief that for myriad reasons, the "pro style" approach to offense leads to diminishing returns, even among the most talented programs running it. I think those system "leave offense on the field" more than certain other types.

 

I'll just note that for all the excitement around this class so far, there's also the '05 and '11 classes that stand as cautionary tales to buying into the hype. We won't know if this was a winning strategy for a least a few years.

I agree with your Point 1 quite a bit.

 

Unfortunately we aren't going to run an offense that fits our region anytime soon. We are clearly in more of a pro style, passing offense now. Having said that, and moving past it...

 

How do you feel about getting some of these "high profile" recruits and that could help attract more of the top 500 mile radius kids? I would venture to opine that if we get a hot shot QB, a famous name WR, a baller of a LB all from Cali that some of the 500 mile kids may give us a little harder look; wanting to play w guys w big names, big stars, big attraction. Do you think it may be a reverse role of attracting some big time out of state recruits FIRST, then seeing how the "base" of 500 mile kids fills in? I'm excited about these recruits and I hope it attracts more 500 mile radius kids!

[Guy Chamberlin]

Armstrong's decision making this past year was consistent with (or, arguably, better than) all other first year QBs in a Coach Riley system.

 

Take from that what you will about Armstrong and/or the system.

 

 

Armstrong's decision making this past year was also consistent with the previous two years.

 

I think that's the fairly simple point people are trying to make.

 

I believe you're also the guy who thought it was up to Riley to turn Terrell Newby into Ameer Abdullah because that's what any good coach would do.

[cm husker]

 

My whole problem with that spin on Epley's comments, which I think taken some of his statements well out of context, is that NU has been competitive during the past 7 years. NC championship competitive? No. And his comments are no revelation on that point (nor would I think he'd claim them to be). But, NU has been a .700+ program, constantly in the top 25 and able to play in 3 conference championships between 2008 and 2014 (or 4 in a span of 9 years, if you include 2006). That's despite a conference switch, too.

 

So, for people to now say, "well, 6-7 is a reflection of our talent level" seems pretty misguided. If this staff takes 9-3 talent to 5-7, will they do better than take 12-0 talent to 8-4? I don't know. We'll see.

 

Personally, I look at the "we recruit everywhere" approach as something akin to a Notre Dame-lite approach. I don't think it's a great model for NU, but I won't rehash why that argument, except to say: I think systems should take the following approach:

 

1. Identify your recruiting base. For Nebraska, I think it's the 500 mile radius, plus a column across the B10 territory, which would be supplemented with cherry picked athletes from the coastal states/big football territories. For all the attacks on my argument, people seem to miss that I actually don't know (or claim to know) whether RIley will take this approach. Yes, the articles are all about the relationships in Cali, but we don't know that this year may be an anomaly because of the close relationship with the Calabasas HS.

 

2. Once you understand the recruiting base, develop your offensive system around the type of talent you're able to consistently attract and retain. For me, that's when I look to TO for guidance. Also, I"m a true believer that at the college level, the option and a mobile QB are keys to a dynamic offense. I freely admit my belief that for myriad reasons, the "pro style" approach to offense leads to diminishing returns, even among the most talented programs running it. I think those system "leave offense on the field" more than certain other types.

 

I'll just note that for all the excitement around this class so far, there's also the '05 and '11 classes that stand as cautionary tales to buying into the hype. We won't know if this was a winning strategy for a least a few years.

I agree with your Point 1 quite a bit.

 

Unfortunately we aren't going to run an offense that fits our region anytime soon. We are clearly in more of a pro style, passing offense now. Having said that, and moving past it...

 

How do you feel about getting some of these "high profile" recruits and that could help attract more of the top 500 mile radius kids? I would venture to opine that if we get a hot shot QB, a famous name WR, a baller of a LB all from Cali that some of the 500 mile kids may give us a little harder look; wanting to play w guys w big names, big stars, big attraction. Do you think it may be a reverse role of attracting some big time out of state recruits FIRST, then seeing how the "base" of 500 mile kids fills in? I'm excited about these recruits and I hope it attracts more 500 mile radius kids!

 

 

I agree with the bolded, which is why I've always said that NU should try to "cherry pick" guys when they can (and always have).

 

I'm talking more about fundamental approaches and investment of resources.

That said, Riley came from P12 country and has relationships there, so it's less of an investment than if he was trying to create them rather than maintain them. I have my doubts on how well they can truly be maintained over time, but we'll see what happens. On the plus side, investment in recruiting is at an all time high, and that will help. But getting kids on campus is much different than keeping them, and I do have some concern around attrition related to coastal players.

 

Bottomline, I still think NU will consistently recruit in that "top of tier 2" range (20 to 35) with some times where we bounce up and sometimes where we fall back a bit. That's why I don't get panicky about recruiting. I want a coach who can take our "standard" classes and win at least 9/10 games a year with a chance at a division and conference title. Then, if we get a string of special classes by hard work, luck or circumstance, we end up with a real special run.

 

My concern is that we have a staff running a system who would take 10 win talent to 6-8 wins and 12 win talent to 8-10. I don't see that making anyone happy in the long run - even though I'm on record as saying that if we can get to 10 win averages with kids who are doing great things off the field, too, we should absolutely never ever fire that coach. That will annoy some here (mainly the trophy chasers who use player accomplishments to reflect upon their own lives), but it's my perspective on what college athletics is all about. And it reflects my belief that no actually "plateaus at 10 wins a season" and if a coach consistently keeps us in that range, there's good potential for him to bounce up to championship level; certainly a better chance than a "fire and forget" approach every time a coach doesn't bring home a conference championship or better trophy during a 5 to 7 year window.

[GBRFAN]

Armstrong's decision making this past year was consistent with (or, arguably, better than) all other first year QBs in a Coach Riley system.

 

Take from that what you will about Armstrong and/or the system.

 

P.s. Every player would/should always say they need to and can improve. That's a given. The question when assessing performance is not to decide whether improvement is desired but where the existing performance ranks against other benchmarks.

 

Are you telling us after your playing days that you have sat down and watched every game that OSU played (past 14 years) and have evaluated the QB decision making compared to TA last year? Impressive!!!!!

[Guy Chamberlin]

 

 

P.s. Every player would/should always say they need to and can improve. That's a given. The question when assessing performance is not to decide whether improvement is desired but where the existing performance ranks against other benchmarks.

Fine....

 

I'll use the bench mark as comparing him to himself in the last staff along with TM.

 

Both amazing athletes that have the ability to do great things. But....both needed or still need to improve their decision making.

 

Nothing about that is disrespectful. I'm a big fan of both players.

Martinez improved every year. His junior year was quite good and he was off to a great start his senior year.

 

It's unfair to expect Tom Brady level decision making out of a college QB. Or even college level Andrew Luck. If that's what we need to make this system tick, we are in deep trouble regarding hitting the stated championship goals.

 

 

We don't need that level of decision making, nor should we expect it, because Tom Bradys and Andrew Lucks are rare.

 

Much less rare are quarterbacks who can complete 60-65% of their passes, make consistent decisions, and scramble a bit when needed. They will generally leave the running game to the running backs, and the fact that they can pass well doesn't mean an end to the running game. It actually helps the running game. Teams can go pass happy one Saturday, smashmouth the next. You are really hung up that we have to choose one over the other, despite the fact that other teams in windswept locations with no higher level of sophistication manage to do quite nicely.

[cm husker]

 

Armstrong's decision making this past year was consistent with (or, arguably, better than) all other first year QBs in a Coach Riley system.

 

Take from that what you will about Armstrong and/or the system.

 

 

Armstrong's decision making this past year was also consistent with the previous two years.

 

I think that's the fairly simple point people are trying to make.

 

I believe you're also the guy who thought it was up to Riley to turn Terrell Newby into Ameer Abdullah because that's what any good coach would do.

 

 

Actually, his trajectory was upward from his freshman season to his sophomore season, and then he took a step back. And that's just talking about his throwing stats. If you look at Martinez, his bounce in improvement came during his JR year. I wish we could have seen how TA would have continued to progress without a major disruption in his and his teammates' careers.

 

As to the RBs, I didn't say that, but I do note that we miss Ron Brown immensely. For whatever reason, we continued to reload at RB each year, even though we never had a guy who was nearly as highly rated as the current group of backs. Hard to know where some of those RBs would be if they'd continued to learn under his tutelage. As I recall, Newby actually had a more promising start to his career than even Abdullah, from a statistical perspective.

[cm husker]

 

 

 

P.s. Every player would/should always say they need to and can improve. That's a given. The question when assessing performance is not to decide whether improvement is desired but where the existing performance ranks against other benchmarks.

Fine....

 

I'll use the bench mark as comparing him to himself in the last staff along with TM.

 

Both amazing athletes that have the ability to do great things. But....both needed or still need to improve their decision making.

 

Nothing about that is disrespectful. I'm a big fan of both players.

Martinez improved every year. His junior year was quite good and he was off to a great start his senior year.

 

It's unfair to expect Tom Brady level decision making out of a college QB. Or even college level Andrew Luck. If that's what we need to make this system tick, we are in deep trouble regarding hitting the stated championship goals.

 

 

We don't need that level of decision making, nor should we expect it, because Tom Bradys and Andrew Lucks are rare.

 

Much less rare are quarterbacks who can complete 60-65% of their passes, make consistent decisions, and scramble a bit when needed. They will generally leave the running game to the running backs, and the fact that they can pass well doesn't mean an end to the running game. It actually helps the running game. Teams can go pass happy one Saturday, smashmouth the next. You are really hung up that we have to choose one over the other, despite the fact that other teams in windswept locations with no higher level of sophistication manage to do quite nicely.

 

 

Can you list some of the top guys from this past season who fit the bill in the bolded and were playing in prostyle systems?

 

The idea that a team "can go pass happy one Saturday and smashmouth the next" is so impossibly misguided that I don't think it's worth explaining again who that just does not lead to consistent results, let alone championship results (I guess you'll now cue up some random stats from Alabama while ignoring the fundamntal differences in our situations).

[cm husker]

 

Armstrong's decision making this past year was consistent with (or, arguably, better than) all other first year QBs in a Coach Riley system.

 

Take from that what you will about Armstrong and/or the system.

 

P.s. Every player would/should always say they need to and can improve. That's a given. The question when assessing performance is not to decide whether improvement is desired but where the existing performance ranks against other benchmarks.

 

Are you telling us after your playing days that you have sat down and watched every game that OSU played (past 14 years) and have evaluated the QB decision making compared to TA last year? Impressive!!!!!

 

 

Didn't watch the games; just looking at the stats.

 

But you raise a good point: I think the reason people are so hard on Armstrong is that they lack perspective on what a "good" versus a "bad" quarterback is at the college level because they assume their guy is making mistakes at a higher rate than other teams.

[Landlord]

So what about Ryan Katz' 18 to 11 TD/INT ratio on 355 attempts his first year starting under Riley?

 

 

Sure seems better than Tommy's 22 to 16 TD/INT ratio on 402 attempts his first year under Riley, and also sure seems to disagree with your claim several times made that Tommy has performed better than all of Riley's first year starting QBs.

[theknife]

I know the nature of these boards is to be overly analytical and debate each side of an argument till each is red in the face; however, I've suspended that for my own sanity and am just enjoying the fact recruiting is looking better than it has in 8 years as of today. At the very least we have momentum and have high profile guys showing us interest. I could care less if that is 1 mile, 500 miles, or 2000 miles. The vibe across the board is improving. Now I'm still in wait and see mode if that will translate to wins come the fall and 'm taking Riley at his candor in saying they should have ran more last year and hoping for the best.

[commando]

to think that this thread started with someone being optimistic because of the late season surge and the recruiting success....and it has devolved into a cm pissing match starting with post #2 in this thread. he can't stand anyone having any hope for the huskers. he has to piss on our shoes and try to tell us it's raining.

[cm husker]

So what about Ryan Katz' 18 to 11 TD/INT ratio on 355 attempts his first year starting under Riley?

 

 

Sure seems better than Tommy's 22 to 16 TD/INT ratio on 402 attempts his first year under Riley, and also sure seems to disagree with your claim several times made that Tommy has performed better than all of Riley's first year starting QBs.

As I've noted over and over, including in that original post, he performed as well, and in most cases better, than other Riley QBs.

 

Katz was the guy who was a redshirt sophomore his first year starting, had a QB rating just slightly below Armstrongs and ended up transferring as a SR (was benched as a JR for Manion, if I recall).

 

Maybe I should just repost the original post.

[BigRedBuster]

 

 

P.s. Every player would/should always say they need to and can improve. That's a given. The question when assessing performance is not to decide whether improvement is desired but where the existing performance ranks against other benchmarks.

Fine....

 

I'll use the bench mark as comparing him to himself in the last staff along with TM.

 

Both amazing athletes that have the ability to do great things. But....both needed or still need to improve their decision making.

 

Nothing about that is disrespectful. I'm a big fan of both players.

Martinez improved every year. His junior year was quite good and he was off to a great start his senior year.

 

It's unfair to expect Tom Brady level decision making out of a college QB. Or even college level Andrew Luck. If that's what we need to make this system tick, we are in deep trouble regarding hitting the stated championship goals.

 

Who has said we need that level?

[commando]

 

 

 

P.s. Every player would/should always say they need to and can improve. That's a given. The question when assessing performance is not to decide whether improvement is desired but where the existing performance ranks against other benchmarks.

Fine....

 

I'll use the bench mark as comparing him to himself in the last staff along with TM.

 

Both amazing athletes that have the ability to do great things. But....both needed or still need to improve their decision making.

 

Nothing about that is disrespectful. I'm a big fan of both players.

Martinez improved every year. His junior year was quite good and he was off to a great start his senior year.

 

It's unfair to expect Tom Brady level decision making out of a college QB. Or even college level Andrew Luck. If that's what we need to make this system tick, we are in deep trouble regarding hitting the stated championship goals.

 

Who has said we need that level?

 

CM said it...no one else has. lol

[BigRedBuster]

 

 

 

I've never said players are beyond critique. But critiques should be accurate and also respectful in tone.

 

 

So...let me ask you this....

 

What players do you think need to improve for us to be as successful as we want to me?

 

Of course....put it in a respectful tone.

Why are you being so disingenuous?

 

Many people on this board say, in effect, this offense was limited by poor decision making and lack of execution by the quarterback (and often the OL).

 

What they ignore is the fundamental questions of: (1) is this system suited to be productive in NE, and (2) did the coaches do a good job of teaching and then calling the system in a way that would put the players in a position to be successful?

 

My only point is, our struggles last year may be a reflection of fundamental flaws in underlying system and people teaching it than the failures of a player or group of players. Based on history, NU's player (and players) performed consistently with all other players in a Riley system.

 

We see the coaching thing maybe more on the defensive side, where coaches didn't have consistent terminology for players.

 

Why won't you answer my question? In a respectful tone of course.

 

You said:

I've never said players are beyond critique. But critiques should be accurate and also respectful in tone.

 

 

However, every time someone even mentions a player needs to improve in a certain way, you jump down their throat claiming they are trashing players and being very disrespectful.

 

So...if you are perfectly fine critiquing players....what players do you think need to improve and how?