Jump to content
Mavric

*** 2019 Recruiting ***

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Ziebol said:

That's what I am thinking. 

NPG

Njoku

MPM

OLB

Bivens

and whoever jumps first.

I was thinking we take more than 4 too. As far as trying to pin down what the biggest need is. Didnt Frost say these last few spots would kind of be the best available regardless of position? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With Bland there are 84 under scholarship, so really there is 1 spot open.  After that, every recruit that signs means somebody currently under scholarship is out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mavric said:

I'd tend to agree with you about DT>WR at this point.  But we should be pretty set at DT for this year so perhaps we're willing to wait for next cycle.

 

Here is why I would take a DT right now over a WR.  It is much easier to find a WR that can come in and almost immediately contribute.  It's much more likely that a DT needs time in the S&C program to develop and get ready to contribute at this level.  My opinion is, we have a number of players in the system that can play multiple positions if needed such as RB, WR, R...etc.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, FrankWheeler said:

With Bland there are 84 under scholarship, so really there is 1 spot open.  After that, every recruit that signs means somebody currently under scholarship is out.

Are you including players who have quit due to injury that are still on scholarship, as they do not count toward the 85.  I also think there will be a few leaving before the fall; graduating Sr. who will not get a lot playing time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, FrankWheeler said:

With Bland there are 84 under scholarship, so really there is 1 spot open.  After that, every recruit that signs means somebody currently under scholarship is out.

 

Yep. We're supposedly taking 4-5 more plus a couple walk-ons (Warner and Armstrong) who deserve it.

 

There will undoubtedly be some "surprising" departures in May.....

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, SouthLincoln Husker said:

Are you including players who have quit due to injury that are still on scholarship, as they do not count toward the 85.  I also think there will be a few leaving before the fall; graduating Sr. who will not get a lot playing time.

 

If you are referring to Weinmaster, I didn't include him.  Yes, there will have to be some leaving.  With what Mav said, it will have to be more than just a few graduate Seniors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

25 commits right now, though Bland is a question mark.  25 open spots plus however many over-signs.  Word is we are taking 29 - leaving one spot for a grad transfers. 

 

Current Scholarships/Commits

QB - 1 - LUKE McCAFFREY
RB - 3 - RAHMIR JOHNSON, RONALD THOMPKINS,  JUCO DEDRICK MILLS, John Bivens
WR - 3-4 - JAMIE NANCEDARIEN CHASE, WANDALE ROBINSON, Demariyon Houston, Charles Njoku
TE - 1 - CHRIS HICKMAN
OT - 3 - MATTHEW ANDERSONBRYCE BENHART, JIMMY FRITZSCHE
OG/C - 1-2 - JUCO DESMOND BLANDMICHAEL LYNN

NT - 0-1 - Matthew Pola-Mao
DE - 4 - ETHAN PIPER, MOSAI NEWSOMBRANT BANKSTY ROBINSON
ILB - 3 - JACKSON HANNAHNICK HENRICHGARRETT SNODGRASS

OLB - 2-3 - GARRETT NELSON, JAMIN GRAHAM, Dylan JordanSteven Parker, JUCO Soni Fonua

CB - 2-3 - QUINTON NEWSOMEJAVIN WRIGHTTavian MayoJamel Starks, DJ James
S - 2 - MYLES FARMERNOA POLA-GATES

  

 Early Enrollees: McCaffrey, WRobinson, Nance, Hickman, Banks, Henrich, Nelson

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 My finish prediction:

 

Pola-Gates

Parker

Njoku/Houston (in that preference)

Starks

Pola-Mao/Bivens (in that preference)

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Warrior10 said:

 My finish prediction:

 

Pola-Gates

Parker

Njoku/Houston (in that preference)

Starks

Pola-Mao/Bivens (in that preference)

I agree, except for Starks.  It seems that he has been ready to commit for awhile. I think he is a plan B for Pola-Gates.   But it also appears that we are thin at CB & DT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Warrior10 said:

 My finish prediction:

 

Pola-Gates

Parker

Njoku/Houston (in that preference)

Starks

Pola-Mao/Bivens (in that preference)

Player ability aside (I agree with the preference) Both areas of the country are nice spots to continue to get a foot hold in. I like the opportunity to keep landing guys in the northeast and Houston with Nance are nice pick ups in Oklahoma. Getting closer to Texas.

 

Pola-Mao/Bivens both seem like high risk high reward type players and either would be nice.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mavric said:

25 commits right now, though Bland is a question mark.  25 open spots plus however many over-signs.  Word is we are taking 29 - leaving one spot for a grad transfers. 

 

Current Scholarships/Commits

QB - 1 - LUKE McCAFFREY
RB - 3 - RAHMIR JOHNSON, RONALD THOMPKINS,  JUCO DEDRICK MILLS, John Bivens
WR - 3-4 - JAMIE NANCEDARIEN CHASE, WANDALE ROBINSON, Demariyon Houston, Charles Njoku
TE - 1 - CHRIS HICKMAN
OT - 3 - MATTHEW ANDERSONBRYCE BENHART, JIMMY FRITZSCHE
OG/C - 1-2 - JUCO DESMOND BLANDMICHAEL LYNN

NT - 0-1 - Matthew Pola-Mao
DE - 4 - ETHAN PIPER, MOSAI NEWSOMBRANT BANKSTY ROBINSON
ILB - 3 - JACKSON HANNAHNICK HENRICHGARRETT SNODGRASS

OLB - 2-3 - GARRETT NELSON, JAMIN GRAHAM, Dylan JordanSteven Parker, JUCO Soni Fonua

CB - 2-3 - QUINTON NEWSOMEJAVIN WRIGHTTavian MayoJamel Starks, DJ James
S - 2 - MYLES FARMERNoa Pola-Gates

  

 Early Enrollees: McCaffrey, WRobinson, Nance, Hickman, Banks, Henrich, Nelson

 

 

Just want to step back from the process and point something out.  We have 25 commits in a pretty decent class.  We still have probably more very good players very interested in coming than we have spots for.  

 

I remember many years when we got to this point in the process and we were grabbing warm bodies.

 

It's a nice change.

  • Plus1 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, spurs1990 said:

Player ability aside (I agree with the preference) Both areas of the country are nice spots to continue to get a foot hold in. I like the opportunity to keep landing guys in the northeast and Houston with Nance are nice pick ups in Oklahoma. Getting closer to Texas.

 

Pola-Mao/Bivens both seem like high risk high reward type players and either would be nice.

I totally agree. Nebraska can make up a lot of ground by getting elite prospects out of OKC or the state in general.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree that DT is more important then WR - however SF is going with best MAN up.  He is going "all in" on the fact that the 2020 class will have some guys that can play or provide depth as FR and guessing that includes the DL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pola-Mao isn't in now?  With the "4" projections how is he out, especially as tied to Noa

 

Edit: I'm caught up.  Most are projecting he's in

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, B.B. Hemingway said:

 

 

Underrated phrase, imo.

 

Not only are we looking at a potential huge jump in quality, but if some of these predictions hold true we are adding players that can do something different. A big body receiver that can help in the red zone, an OLB that can play with his hand down on third and long, situational assets we were really lacking last year. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, brophog said:

 

Not only are we looking at a potential huge jump in quality, but if some of these predictions hold true we are adding players that can do something different. A big body receiver that can help in the red zone, an OLB that can play with his hand down on third and long, situational assets we were really lacking last year. 

 

 

Granted these are all projections, as far as immediate ideas. But we seem to have a real plan. It has been said that Frost intends to take the best talent at the time, but I doubt he takes a 4 star QB right now if he is the best available. We have identified areas of need, WR, pass rush, and Secondary as areas of immediate need. These areas have been more than covered with our aggressive approach to recruiting.

 

In the past our approach to recruiting hasn't been able to define talent like our new staff, so anybody with some stars has been deemed a desirable recruit. Now we have built relationships across the country with recruits who maybe didn't fit in initially with the same thought process that early enrollees did. I honestly think the early signing period helped everyone involved minus the recruits who get massive coaching changes between signing and enrolling periods.

 

so in conclusion it helped the universities football programs and virtually no one else

I was going in a positive direction and then... the rules happened :ahhhhhhhh

  • Eyeroll 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can someone tell me why again we’re running a 3-4 as a base rather than a 4-3? 3-4 is very reliant on pressure from athletic freaks at OLB, something that is incredibly hard to recruit, especially for Nebraska.

 

why not return to the 4-3 and rely on pressure from various positions?

  • Eyeroll 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, C-4 said:

Can someone tell me why again we’re running a 3-4 as a base rather than a 4-3? 3-4 is very reliant on pressure from athletic freaks at OLB, something that is incredibly hard to recruit, especially for Nebraska.

 

why not return to the 4-3 and rely on pressure from various positions?

Because that's Chinander's base defense philosophy.

  • Plus1 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, C-4 said:

Can someone tell me why again we’re running a 3-4 as a base rather than a 4-3? 3-4 is very reliant on pressure from athletic freaks at OLB, something that is incredibly hard to recruit, especially for Nebraska.

 

why not return to the 4-3 and rely on pressure from various positions?

The 4-3 relies on athletic freaks to put pressure on the QB. Randy Gregory is the only true pass rusher we've had in... over a decade?

  • Plus1 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, C-4 said:

Can someone tell me why again we’re running a 3-4 as a base rather than a 4-3?

 

 

Image result for walk in walk out simpsons gif

  • Plus1 6
  • Haha 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, C-4 said:

Can someone tell me why again we’re running a 3-4 as a base rather than a 4-3? 3-4 is very reliant on pressure from athletic freaks at OLB, something that is incredibly hard to recruit, especially for Nebraska.

 

why not return to the 4-3 and rely on pressure from various positions?

Why cant we rely on pressure from various positions in a 3-4? 

  • Plus1 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, C-4 said:

Can someone tell me why again we’re running a 3-4 as a base rather than a 4-3? 3-4 is very reliant on pressure from athletic freaks at OLB, something that is incredibly hard to recruit, especially for Nebraska.

 

why not return to the 4-3 and rely on pressure from various positions?

 

It's edge rushers that are hard to recruit. They're hard to recruit whether they stand up or have a hand down. Big, explosive people are rare, therefore a commodity. They're even more important against today's one back offenses that take numbers out of the box, giving a defense fewer potential positions from which to generate pressure. All of those receivers also means the ball tends to get out quicker, again, limiting how you can generate pressure, and forcing any outside pressure to need to get there that much quicker.

 

Edge rushers are hard to recruit in college and expensive in the NFL.

 

 

 

 

  • Plus1 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, AlaSker said:

Granted these are all projections, as far as immediate ideas. But we seem to have a real plan. It has been said that Frost intends to take the best talent at the time, but I doubt he takes a 4 star QB right now if he is the best available. We have identified areas of need, WR, pass rush, and Secondary as areas of immediate need. These areas have been more than covered with our aggressive approach to recruiting.

 

We are still taking best available talent, but our schemes are very versatile so we can plug in a lot of different athletes and make things work. Our needs are also still pretty great, every position could use help at this point. If QBs didn't transfer at such a ridiculous rate, an argument could even be made there.

 

We are very much still in the collecting phase. JUCO, transfers, position changes. It's about getting a talent upgrade and increasing numbers.

  • Plus1 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, brophog said:

 

It's edge rushers that are hard to recruit. They're hard to recruit whether they stand up or have a hand down. Big, explosive people are rare, therefore a commodity. They're even more important against today's one back offenses that take numbers out of the box, giving a defense fewer potential positions from which to generate pressure. All of those receivers also means the ball tends to get out quicker, again, limiting how you can generate pressure, and forcing any outside pressure to need to get there that much quicker.

 

Edge rushers are hard to recruit in college and expensive in the NFL.

 

 

 

 

 

Bingo. Explosive edge rushers are at a premium and the top programs seem to get their pick of those that are available. It doesn't matter if it's a 4-3 or a 3-4. Outside of elite OTs, edge rushers are gold in football.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Treand3 said:

 

Bingo. Explosive edge rushers are at a premium and the top programs seem to get their pick of those that are available. It doesn't matter if it's a 4-3 or a 3-4. Outside of elite OTs, edge rushers are gold in football.

Right. But generally speaking, pressures and sacks come more often from the interior for a 4-3 than a 3-4, mostly because there’s a UT position and D-lineman have less responsibility in the run game. Thus while a pass rushing end is gold in a 4-4, a pass rushing olb is practically a requirement for a 3-4. If we can’t get an edge rusher consistently, it just seems like it’d make more sense to run a 4-3.

 

i realize that, even though I’ve taken no part of these discussions, this topic has been done to death on these boards and probably has gotten to the point where any mention of it just stirs the pot. So I guess I’ll just leave this where it is. 

  • Eyeroll 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, C-4 said:

Right. But generally speaking, pressures and sacks come more often from the interior for a 4-3 than a 3-4, mostly because there’s a UT position and D-lineman have less responsibility in the run game. Thus while a pass rushing end is gold in a 4-4, a pass rushing olb is practically a requirement for a 3-4. If we can’t get an edge rusher consistently, it just seems like it’d make more sense to run a 4-3.

 

i realize that, even though I’ve taken no part of these discussions, this topic has been done to death on these boards and probably has gotten to the point where any mention of it just stirs the pot. So I guess I’ll just leave this where it is. 

 

We struggled getting pass rushers in a 4-3. Just my opinion, it's too early to feel we need to go back to a 4-3. OLB is one of the most difficult positions to recruit, however, depending on what happens this cycle, the staff will have signed a 4* OLB in back-to-back cycles. It would've had 2 last cycle had Jean-Baptiste not flake out at the last minute.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, C-4 said:

Right. But generally speaking, pressures and sacks come more often from the interior for a 4-3 than a 3-4, mostly because there’s a UT position and D-lineman have less responsibility in the run game. Thus while a pass rushing end is gold in a 4-4, a pass rushing olb is practically a requirement for a 3-4. If we can’t get an edge rusher consistently, it just seems like it’d make more sense to run a 4-3.

 

i realize that, even though I’ve taken no part of these discussions, this topic has been done to death on these boards and probably has gotten to the point where any mention of it just stirs the pot. So I guess I’ll just leave this where it is. 

 

They may be more common to get from interior guys in a 4-3 than a 3-4 but they are still way more common from the edge guys regardless of the defense.

 

Almost all the guys we're recruiting for OLB are listed as Weakside Defensive Ends by the recruiting services.  That means they'd play DE in a 4-3 but they'll play OLB if they go to a 3-4 system.  It's the same guys we're recruiting regardless of what scheme we're running.


In theory you can usually get more pressure from a 3-4 because you can bring the fourth rusher from any of the four LB spots and you have more athletes on the field.  A bit too early to tell yet how Chins uses his guys - when he gets his guys - but I think pointing to the base alignment as the root issue is a bit short-sighted.

  • Plus1 3
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, C-4 said:

Right. But generally speaking, pressures and sacks come more often from the interior for a 4-3 than a 3-4, mostly because there’s a UT position and D-lineman have less responsibility in the run game. Thus while a pass rushing end is gold in a 4-4, a pass rushing olb is practically a requirement for a 3-4. If we can’t get an edge rusher consistently, it just seems like it’d make more sense to run a 4-3.

 

i realize that, even though I’ve taken no part of these discussions, this topic has been done to death on these boards and probably has gotten to the point where any mention of it just stirs the pot. So I guess I’ll just leave this where it is. 

 

In reality, with all of the fronts, techniques and alignments used by modern defenses it usually boils down to what you want to call it. Almost nobody bases out of a 3-4 or 4-3 by personnel because so very much of football is dominated by 10 or 11 personnel. Many defenses have somebody as a hybrid of sorts, usually a LB/S or DE/OLB, and if they don't they have so many sub-packages as to make any idea of a base defense a moot point.

 

The very idea of a base defense goes back to when offenses primarily ran the ball and passing was the exception. If anything, modern shotgun oriented schemes have flipped that script. Many organizations that specialize in player evaluation have just begun generalizing based on task, because trying to figure out exactly what position a guy like JJ Watt or Khalil Mack plays is a pointless exercise.

  • Plus1 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For awhile there I was expecting this class not to take a jump from past years and still be in that 24 or 25 range. Glad to be wrong and to be right on the verge of top 20 in the composite and close to top 15 in rivals. That average recruit rating is as high as we've had it and to do that with the volume of recruits we have is pretty impressive too.

  • Plus1 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, spurs1990 said:

For awhile there I was expecting this class not to take a jump from past years and still be in that 24 or 25 range. Glad to be wrong and to be right on the verge of top 20 in the composite and close to top 15 in rivals. That average recruit rating is as high as we've had it and to do that with the volume of recruits we have is pretty impressive too.

I think next year will be even better and becomes the new standard 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, C-4 said:

Can someone tell me why again we’re running a 3-4 as a base rather than a 4-3? 3-4 is very reliant on pressure from athletic freaks at OLB, something that is incredibly hard to recruit, especially for Nebraska.

 

why not return to the 4-3 and rely on pressure from various positions?

The truth is the 3-4 allows you to be more multiple with your pressures rather than a 4-3 where you are telling the offense 4 of your rushers. In a 3-4 you are only telling 3 of your 4 rushers. If you want to bring a standard 4 man pressure the offense is in a bit of a bind because they do not know which outside backer will rush. It also allows you to match up better against 3 and 4 wide receiver sets. Where the 3-4 is not as good is against a stud tight end or tight formations. But most 3-4 defenses shift to a bear front in those situations also called a TNT formation.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, brophog said:

In reality, with all of the fronts, techniques and alignments used by modern defenses it usually boils down to what you want to call it. Almost nobody bases out of a 3-4 or 4-3 by personnel because so very much of football is dominated by 10 or 11 personnel. Many defenses have somebody as a hybrid of sorts, usually a LB/S or DE/OLB, and if they don't they have so many sub-packages as to make any idea of a base defense a moot point.

 

The very idea of a base defense goes back to when offenses primarily ran the ball and passing was the exception. If anything, modern shotgun oriented schemes have flipped that script. Many organizations that specialize in player evaluation have just begun generalizing based on task, because trying to figure out exactly what position a guy like JJ Watt or Khalil Mack plays is a pointless exercise.

 

Right. Like in the NFL these days, the real de facto 'base' defense for most teams is nickel, even if they're labeled 4-3 or 3-4.

 

Then of course, there's what Chinander himself said about his D: "Is there going to three down linemen? Yeah, maybe. Sometimes, sometimes not. The thing I don’t understand – you guys know more about it than I do now – you know, there's a three-technique, a five-technique and a one-technique. This guy's got his hand on the ground and now it's a 4-3. Now he's standing up and it's a 3-4. It's going to be a multiple defense. Sometimes it'll be four guys with their hands down, sometimes three."

 

In short, don't get too worked up about the labels.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why can't we just go back to that defense were are DL stands 2 yards off the line of scrimmage - was MR or BP?

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, GBRFAN said:

Why can't we just go back to that defense were are DL stands 2 yards off the line of scrimmage - was MR or BP?

 

 

I think people complained about that with Pelini the last couple years, then when Riley came the players were happy not to have to think anymore and just attack, but I'm not sure that actually happened, and it definitely didn't happen with Diaco.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

I think people complained about that with Pelini the last couple years, then when Riley came the players were happy not to have to think anymore and just attack, but I'm not sure that actually happened, and it definitely didn't happen with Diaco.

 

Back in the day when people were happy that Banker was hired because we'd run a "more simple defense" that would "get the best athletes on the field."

 

Good times.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

Back in the day when people were happy that Banker was hired because we'd run a "more simple defense" that would "get the best athletes on the field."

 

Good times.

Grass is always greener.  Remember the miami QB said it was like playing a high school defense.  I tend to agree with him.  

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if we figured how to take all of Bivens, Mao, Parker, Njoku and Houston....we still only jump Stanford to be at #19. 

 

So, our class rank is pretty much what it’s going to be. 

 

Fyi.....I dont expect to take all of these. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

Even if we figured how to take all of Bivens, Mao, Parker, Njoku and Houston....we still only jump Stanford to be at #19. 

 

So, our class rank is pretty much what it’s going to be. 

 

Fyi.....I dont expect to take all of these. 

 

I know we have great recruits already but doesn’t that sound like a f#&%ing haul?

 

I know we will miss on one or two, but in my opinion three of those are ours.

 

What a class. With fit, need and ability all being represented.

 

Maybe it’s my rose colored glasses but...

 

damn that looks goood to me.

 

Really.

  • Eyeroll 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Imagining Alabama gets multiple 5 stars on the regular and mostly 4 stars seems like a wet dream for Nebraska. 

 

While I don’t think we need that to be competitive and possibly great. Due to what I think our coaching can do, and can emphasize via the right people for specific jobs.

 

The trends in this class and 2020 look tremendous, if we didn’t end up in the top 15 next year in recruiting I would be absolutely shocked.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, AlaSker said:

 

I know we have great recruits already but doesn’t that sound like a f#&%ing haul?

 

I know we will miss on one or two, but in my opinion three of those are ours.

 

What a class. With fit, need and ability all being represented.

 

Maybe it’s my rose colored glasses but...

 

damn that looks goood to me.

 

Really.

 

Like you, I think we could get maybe three of these.  Mao, Parker and Njuko or Houston.

 

As for the class, it's a nice class.  I think we have some really good players in it and, like I've said before, it's nice to be ending it with highly sought after players instead of guys we scramble to find and nobody has ever heard of them before.  

 

The class in the grand scheme of things though is a little better than our average class, but not that much.  I wouldn't quite say it's an amazing class....but a nice class.  

 

To me, an amazing class will be when we start gettin the majority of recruits 4 star and up.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, spurs1990 said:

Didn't realize the elder Daniels counted against our 30

 

Yeah, I was fairly sure that was the case as they had always talked about 30 but that included a couple spots for grad transfers.

 

So we're at 26 right now - not counting Bland.  We definitely want an OLB and a WR.  That would be 28.  I wonder if they'll see where we're at after that and decide what to do about Bland and saving another spot for a grad transfer.  They'd basically be looking at taking two out of Bland, Bivens, Matthew Pola-Mao, Starks/Mayo and saving a spot for one more grad transfer.

 

Good to have options I guess.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

Like you, I think we could get maybe three of these.  Mao, Parker and Njuko or Houston.

 

As for the class, it's a nice class.  I think we have some really good players in it and, like I've said before, it's nice to be ending it with highly sought after players instead of guys we scramble to find and nobody has ever heard of them before.  

 

The class in the grand scheme of things though is a little better than our average class, but not that much.  I wouldn't quite say it's an amazing class....but a nice class.  

 

To me, an amazing class will be when we start gettin the majority of recruits 4 star and up.

The only thing that is persuading me to this assumption is the coaching staff.

 

In hoping that 90-95 percent of these kids don’t only stay at Nebraska but make an impact in some fashion. Due to the character I think this staff recruits for.... here is hoping!

 

i would ultimately be happy that 75 percent makes an impact and 80 percent stay, that is a possibility for this class and I feel will only dwindle as classes get “better”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, AlaSker said:

The only thing that is persuading me to this assumption is the coaching staff.

 

In hoping that 90-95 percent of these kids don’t only stay at Nebraska but make an impact in some fashion. Due to the character I think this staff recruits for.... here is hoping!

 

i would ultimately be happy that 75 percent makes an impact and 80 percent stay, that is a possibility for this class and I feel will only dwindle as classes get “better”

 

I think what you'll find is that the attrition rate for this class will be very similar to the national average.  I can't remember what that is, but the average attrition rate is higher than a lot of people think.

 

Where I think the staff will make the biggest difference is that they will be able to motivate and develop the top of the class better than previous staffs.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

Like you, I think we could get maybe three of these.  Mao, Parker and Njuko or Houston.

 

As for the class, it's a nice class.  I think we have some really good players in it and, like I've said before, it's nice to be ending it with highly sought after players instead of guys we scramble to find and nobody has ever heard of them before.  

 

The class in the grand scheme of things though is a little better than our average class, but not that much.  I wouldn't quite say it's an amazing class....but a nice class.  

 

To me, an amazing class will be when we start gettin the majority of recruits 4 star and up.

 

Agree 100% with the star rating of this post.  The only thing that makes the class better then what it is on paper is that this staff has recruited a body type that they feel they can improve.  They are also (i assume) getting the culture type that they want.  Their ability to develop players should make this class closer to what you are referring to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×